Is RAD-140 a peptide? Chemical identity, androgen receptor research, clinical evidence, and safety

RAD-140, also known as wozilazarm (vosilasarm), belongs to the group of selective androgen receptor modulators (SARM) and not to peptides. Its non-steroidal chemical structure and pharmacological activity related to the androgen receptor explain why the term „RAD-140 peptide” is incorrect. The available literature includes medical chemistry, experimental models, early clinical research on breast cancer, and reports of possible harms. These sources should be interpreted separately. The evidence that the compound acts on the receptor does not mean that it is safe or effective in improving body shape. 1 2

Establishing scientific identity is only a starting point. A research publication may describe a well-characterized molecule, while the product available on the market may differ in composition, substance content, stereochemistry, or the presence of impurities. Similarly, a clinical result obtained in a strictly selected population of oncology patients cannot be automatically extrapolated to healthy individuals. Distinguishing between the substance, the investigational product, and the expected result is fundamental to the interpretation of studies on RAD-140.

What is RAD-140? Names, synonyms and identity

RAD-140 and RAD140 are two variants of the same development designation. Vosilasarm is the name used in official oncology sources, while Testolone is a commonly used alternative name. Some publications and offers also use the term Testalone. The compound is also listed under EP0062 in the ClinicalTrials.gov registry. These names should be verified against the actual compound and study documentation, rather than assuming equivalence simply because the vendor lists them together. 1 3

The names appearing in the drug development documentation serve different functions. An early designation, such as RAD-140, may remain popular long after another name appears in oncology literature. The development code, international name, and trade name used in sales may refer to the same intended structure, but their presence in the product offering does not constitute confirmation of chemical identity. To properly search the literature, researchers should compare synonyms with original publications, entries in registries, and chemical identifiers.

This distinction is particularly important when reports describe adverse events following the use of a product purchased outside a clinical trial. Such reports deserve attention, but the exact exposure may be less certain than in a controlled trial. A responsible summary may indicate a reported association with the event, without suggesting that the label itself confirms the full composition of the product.

The research compound is a chemically defined molecule. The bottle sold online under its name constitutes a separate object of evidentiary assessment. The label does not confirm the content, concentration, stereochemical identity, impurities, or equivalence to the material used in clinical trials. This is particularly important when interpreting both user reports and descriptions of adverse events.

A chemical analysis of products sold online as SARMs revealed significant discrepancies between product descriptions and actual content. The study concerned the class of products available on the market, not a verifiable sample of each currently sold RAD-140 preparation. Its significance lies in showing the limitations of relying on labels rather than determining a universal percentage of impurities in RAD-140 products. 4

The presence of a substance in an oncology dictionary or clinical trial registry does not mean that it has been approved as a medicine. These sources identify substances and research programs, but do not confirm all uses or all products available for sale.

How is RAD-140 classified? Peptide, protein, mixture, or other substance?

RAD-140 is a non-steroidal small molecule that modulates the androgen receptor. It is neither a peptide nor a protein. Its structure does not constitute a polymer of amino acid residues, and the compound itself is not classified as a growth hormone-releasing peptide or a peptide bioregulator. 2

Peptides consist of amino acid residues linked by peptide bonds. RAD-140 does not have such a backbone or amino acid sequence. Its activity is, however, studied by interactions with the nuclear hormone receptor. The classification therefore depends on the chemical structure and receptor pharmacology, rather than on the type of website or catalog in which the compound appears.

The second important distinction concerns the significance of anabolic activity. The compound can elicit an anabolic signal in an experimental model, while not being an approved anabolic drug, an effective intervention that increases strength, or a safe supplement. Tissue selectivity is a property measured under specific conditions, and not an unconditional protection against action in other parts of the body.

The term „non-steroidal” does not mean „non-hormonal” or the lack of ability to affect hormone-sensitive tissues. It simply means that the molecular structure differs from the steroid-like structure of substances such as testosterone. A different structure can still interact with the androgen receptor and influence further biological responses.

Similarly, the term „selective” describes the research objective and the context-dependent pharmacology. It should not be interpreted as acting exclusively on skeletal muscles, having no effect on the reproductive system, or having no systemic toxicity. Selectivity must be demonstrated for specific endpoints, exposure levels, and tissues.

The FDA warns that SARMs sold for bodybuilding purposes are not approved drugs but rather approved dietary supplements. The warnings regarding the entire category should not be confused with a clinical assessment of the frequency of events for each compound. However, they directly undermine the assumption that labeling a product as a „supplement” confirms its approval. 5

The structure and composition of RAD-140 – what was established?

The PubChem database lists RAD140 as having a C20H16ClN5O2 molecular formula and a molecular mass of approximately 393.8 g/mol. The chemical description also includes the specific stereochemistry. These characteristics identify a specific small molecule rather than an amino acid sequence or the molecular mass of a peptide. 6

In the case of a chemically defined research compound, the useful identification profile includes a summary formula, molecular mass, stereochemical specification, and a verifiable record of the structure. However, for a real sample, analysts must additionally determine whether the expected compound is actually present and whether its concentration corresponds to the declaration. These are related but distinct questions.

Chromatographic methods can help in the separation of components, and mass spectrometry can support identification. However, no single test needs to resolve all issues regarding structure and formulation. For example, two stereochemically isomeric forms can have the same nominal molecular mass while exhibiting different properties. Analytical quality documentation should specify the scope of the studies performed and avoid converting a narrow purity measurement into a general safety assurance.

The original publication in the field of medical chemistry describes the design, synthesis, and preclinical characterization of RAD-140. It provides a fundamental scientific source for discussing the research compound, rather than relying on vendor descriptions. 2

However, knowledge of the intended molecular structure is not equivalent to determining the composition of the finished product. The product may contain solvents, fillers, other active substances, or impurities. The relevant analytical assessment must answer a specific research question. The identity, quantity, chemical purity, stereochemical composition, and stability are separate results.

For example, a mass consistent with the expected molecule does not independently confirm all aspects of its stereochemistry or exclude all impurities. Similarly, a percent chromatographic purity does not confirm the formulation's suitability for clinical use. These are general analytical limitations, not a claim that every sample has the same defect.

Since the compound’s name is widely used outside controlled studies, articles should consistently distinguish „RAD-140 as a defined molecule” from „a product declared to contain RAD-140.” Otherwise, uncertainty about the product could be mistakenly attributed to the molecule itself, or the known identity of the molecule could be used to suggest the reliability of an unverified preparation.

Studies on RAD-140 – evidence in humans, animals and in the laboratory

Results of laboratory and animal studies

Evidence can be organized according to what a given type of study is able to demonstrate. Cell studies can show molecular responses in a controlled environment. Animal studies allow analysis of results at the tissue level and the formulation of hypotheses regarding exposure and biological effects. Early clinical studies can assess pharmacology and tolerability in humans in specific populations. None of these stages should be presented as a substitute for well-controlled studies regarding another intended use.

The difference between exploratory activity and proven benefit is particularly important for RAD-140, because the human studies described here focus on advanced cancer. Oncology studies may allow for a different level of uncertainty and use different endpoints than studies designed for essentially healthy adults.

Initial development work evaluated androgen receptor-related activity and tissue responses in preclinical models. These experiments helped establish RAD-140 as a potential candidate in the SARM group, but did not demonstrate safe or effective bodybuilding-enhancing therapy in humans. The tissue endpoints in animals cannot be equated with human strength, training results, or long-term health outcomes. 2

A separate study analyzed the neuroprotective effects in neuronal cultures and a mouse model of injury. These are preclinical neurological studies, and not evidence that RAD-140 improves memory in humans, cures dementia, or protects the brain of athletes. The model, endpoint, and exposure conditions are an integral part of the result. 7

Studies on breast cancer analyzed models that were positive for androgen and estrogen receptors. The researchers reported androgen receptor agonism and inhibition of estrogen-related signaling, as well as tumor growth suppression in experimental systems. These results supported a specific oncological hypothesis. They do not mean that the compound generally prevents tumors or produces the same effect in every tumor. 8

Clinical studies involving humans

In the published phase 1 study, which was the first study in humans, twenty-two postmenopausal women with ER-positive/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer participated. Safety, pharmacokinetics, target receptor interaction, and preliminary antitumor activity were analyzed. The population and study objective fundamentally differ from healthy adults interested in body transformation. 9

The study reported one partial response and a clinical benefit rate of 18.2% after 24 weeks. Abnormal liver test results were an important finding during treatment. However, it should not be automatically attributed to the treatment in all these cases. The publication separately presented treatment-related events, including grade 3 events in seven participants, with no grade 4 events considered related to treatment. The small, uncontrolled early-phase results require cautious interpretation. 9

Another Phase 1/2 study EP0062 has been registered under the number NCT05573126 and concerns advanced or metastatic breast cancer with a specific receptor profile. The study registration file reviewed for this article indicated ongoing recruitment and the absence of published results. The registration of the study documents the conduct of the study, not its successful results or product approval. 3

Reports on safety in humans

The published case report presents acute liver injury in a man reporting the use of RAD-140, with improvement after discontinuation. The case report justifies concerns and helps with clinical diagnosis, but does not allow determining the frequency of events or independently confirming each component of the ingested product. The assessment of the causal relationship should remain limited to the evidence documented in this case. 10

Mechanism of action studied in the context of RAD-140

The main mechanism under investigation is androgen receptor modulation, which regulates gene expression in a context-dependent manner. Interaction with the receptor can lead to various consequences depending on the cell type, other signaling pathways, and the disease state.

Androgen receptors act as transcription regulators. After they are activated, they can influence the expression of specific genes, but the final result depends on the tissue and the surrounding signaling environment. This same family of receptors is involved in many physiological systems. Therefore, the term „selective” should be interpreted based on real experimental comparisons, and not as an assumption that only one organ is affected.

Oncological results also show a difference between receptor activity and the final clinical outcome. An androgen receptor agonist can alter estrogen-related signaling in a specific tumor model, but this observation does not prove that it prevents tumors, improves survival, or provides benefits in another tumor type. Mechanistic consistency is valuable but does not constitute a clinical endpoint.

The original publication regarding breast cancer models describes RAD-140 as an androgen receptor agonist under these conditions, influencing estrogen receptor signaling and tumor growth. It would therefore be an oversimplification to state that the compound uniformly „blocks androgen receptors” just because tumor growth is suppressed. The biological outcome and activity at the receptor level are not equivalent descriptions. 8

In a phase 1 clinical study, biomarkers were measured and paired tumor samples analyzed to investigate the effect with a molecular target. Evidence that the intended pathway is altered is valuable, but in and of itself does not confirm sustained clinical benefit. The biological pathway can change without improving survival, symptoms, physical function, or quality of life. 9

The same principle applies to claims related to muscle. Preclinical anabolic response provides a reason for further investigation of the relationship, rather than a substitute for controlled evidence in humans that separately measure muscle mass, strength, function, and damage. Even a real change in one endpoint does not automatically confirm the others.

Mechanistic results should therefore be presented as researched explanations, supported to varying degrees in specific systems. They are not universal predictions for every user, disease, or product.

Limitations of scientific evidence regarding RAD-140

The most important limitation is the mismatch of the population. Available early clinical evidence in oncology concerns patients with serious diseases who are under study supervision. Neither the risk tolerance standards nor the expected benefits in such a context can be directly transferred to healthy individuals.

A reliable assessment distinguishes at least four areas of uncertainty. First, clinical efficacy depends on the indication: anti-tumor observations cannot confirm efficacy in muscle building. Second, safety depends on exposure, population, duration, and the method of collecting data on adverse events. Third, products outside controlled studies may not correspond to the substance being studied. Fourth, regulatory and anti-doping classifications address legal or sports-related questions, rather than demonstrating clinical benefits.

These limitations also apply to comparing anecdotal relationships. A person may describe an apparent change in appearance or performance, but without confirmed exposure, baseline measurements, an appropriate control group, and systematic observation, a causal relationship cannot be established. In contrast, a description of the injury may indicate a potential hazard without specifying the probability of such an event in a larger population.

Other limitations include small clinical trials, limited controlled efficacy data, uncertain long-term results in non-clinical applications, and the uncertain identity of products sourced outside the research environment. Case reports provide clues, but do not allow for quantification of frequency. Market analyses show possible labeling problems, but do not confirm or disqualify any current product.

Regulatory regulations and sports rules are separate from effectiveness. The FDA warnings describe SARMs as unapproved products associated with serious health concerns. The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) list of prohibited substances for 2026 bans RAD140 in the SARMs and anabolic agents category for the entire time. Neither the seller’s „for research purposes” declaration nor the intended manner of use by the athlete do not change the classification of the doping substance. 5 11

The evidence therefore supports a chemically defined research molecule with demonstrated biological activity and a history of oncology research. It does not support a validated muscle-building supplement, a safe recreational use regimen, or a clinically proven improvement in cognitive function.

Frequently asked questions about RAD-140

1. Does RAD-140 mean a specific substance?

Yes. The labeling identifies a chemically defined small molecule. However, this does not confirm the content of every product sold under that name. Chemical identity in the publication and the verified composition of a specific bottle are separate matters, therefore the equivalence of the products requires appropriate evidence. 6 4 The substance identifier can support data matching between databases, but confirmation of the authenticity of a sample requires measurements performed on that sample. Differentiation is essential when the test result is intended to serve as an argument in favor of a product sold independently.

2. What do the available studies on RAD-140 confirm?

They confirm preclinical activity associated with the androgen receptor and early studies in humans with advanced breast cancer with a specific receptor profile, as well as raising safety concerns. They do not confirm effective or safe use in bodybuilding. The conclusions should refer to the actually studied populations and results, rather than being generalized based on the word „anabolic”. 2 9 The evidence cited here involving humans pertains to oncological studies, not to the controlled evaluation of training results. A reliable conclusion regarding the subject matter would require an appropriate population, previously defined endpoints, and safety monitoring.

3. Is RAD-140 a peptide?

No. RAD-140 is a non-steroidal SARM with a small molecule structure rather than an amino acid chain. Queries such as „RAD140 peptides” reflect the way users group products, not scientific classification. Its pharmacology and evidence should therefore be evaluated independently of peptide drugs. 2 It does not possess an amino acid chain linked by peptide bonds. Proper classification also helps to avoid the transfer of pharmacological assumptions from peptide hormones to androgen receptor modulators.

4. Are RAD140 and wozilazarm (vosilasarm) the same name for the same substance?

Yes. Official oncology sources link the name vosilasarm to RAD140 and its common synonyms. However, the alternative name on the product label does not confirm the actual molecule or formulation. Name matching is useful when searching for literature, while analytical and regulatory verification remain separate tasks. 1 Comparing synonyms helps find studies in different databases, but it does not determine the content of the online product. Clinical evidence refers to real research material and its specific application.

5. Does the non-steroidal nature of RAD-140 mean that it does not affect hormones?

No. The term „non-steroidal” describes the chemical structure, not the lack of endocrine activity. RAD-140 was developed to interact with the androgen receptor, and human studies evaluated markers of this activity. A different molecular structure does not justify the assumption that hormone-sensitive tissues remain intact. 2 9 Hormonal activity refers to biological signaling, and not just to the molecule's similarity to a steroid. Non-steroidal receptor modulators can also affect pathways related to the hormonal system.

6. Does selectivity mean that RAD-140 only works on muscles?

No. Selectivity depends on the conditions and the endpoint, and does not mean that skeletal muscle is the sole target of action. RAD-140 has been studied in tumor and neurological models, as well as in preclinical anabolic studies. This term should not be used to suggest that other tissues or systemic risks are not relevant. 8 7 Selectivity is measured against specific tissues and endpoints at the tested exposure levels. This is not evidence that the liver, reproductive system, or other organs are protected from all adverse effects.

7. Was RAD-140 studied in humans?

Yes. Twenty-two postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer participated in the first published clinical study. This confirms the existence of clinical trials, but not the safety or efficacy in healthy women and men interested in body transformation. The population and the study objective are fundamental for interpretation. 9 The very fact of conducting a study in humans is important, but the context determines what conclusions can be drawn. A small study of advanced cancer does not determine the benefits and risks in healthy populations.

8. Does oncological testing prove the benefits of muscle building?

No. The study was designed around oncological safety, pharmacology, and tumor-related outcomes, rather than a controlled evaluation of training results. The evidence cannot be extrapolated simply because the same receptor is involved. The claim regarding bodybuilding would require appropriate comparisons in humans and separate measurements of muscle mass, strength, function, and damage. 9 The tumor response and skeletal muscle function are different clinical outcomes. Even strong evidence regarding one of them would not automatically confirm the other.

9. Is RAD-140 an approved dietary supplement?

The supplement’s label alone does not confirm FDA approval, and the agency indicates that SARMs sold in this manner are unapproved drugs. Regulatory status should be verified for the relevant jurisdiction and product. Marketing terminology does not replace official approval. 5 The regulatory category of a product sold as a supplement is not determined solely by its labeling. In the case of claims of approval based on the appropriate standard, official permits regarding the specific product are required.

10. Does the registration of a clinical trial mean that approval is close?

No. Registration documents a planned or ongoing study, not a favorable outcome or a future regulatory decision. The analyzed entry EP0062 did not include published results. Studies may be modified, interrupted, or fail to demonstrate sufficient benefits; therefore, the status of development should not be presented as a promise. 3 The registry can document recruitment and planned endpoints long before the results are available for analysis. It should not be cited as if the study had already shown effectiveness.

11. Could RAD-140 be associated with liver damage?

Yes. An early clinical study revealed abnormalities in liver test results, and a separate case report described liver damage associated with the reported use of the substance. These sources vary by project and do not allow for a single percent risk for all users. However, they undermine claims that liver concerns can be ignored. 9 10 Changes in hepatic enzyme activity and a documented case of injury warrant caution, although the frequency and individual susceptibility remain uncertain. It is important to distinguish the safety signal from the quantitatively determined risk.

12. Are all the adverse events occurring during treatment caused by them?

No. An event occurring during treatment means that it occurred or worsened during the appropriate observation period. Determining causality requires a separate assessment. In the RAD-140 study, separate reports were made of events occurring during treatment and events considered related to treatment. Maintaining this distinction allows for avoiding both overstating the certainty of the causal link and overlooking clinically important safety observations. 9 Events occurring during therapy may have other causes, especially in people with a serious underlying condition. Therefore, researchers assess the relationship with the treatment separately from the time of occurrence.

13. Do neuroprotective results in animals confirm the benefits for memory?

No. The results obtained in neuronal and mouse models of injury do not indicate an improvement in cognitive function in humans. Confirmation of the benefits would require appropriate clinical endpoints, comparisons, exposure and safety assessments. Preclinical research provides a research hypothesis, not a verified claim of memory improvement. 7 Experimental models of damage allow testing a biological hypothesis, but they do not measure memory or everyday cognitive functions in humans. These results require direct human studies.

14. Are the RAD-140 products available online equivalent to the material from clinical trials?

Such equivalence cannot be assumed. Analysis of products sold as SARMs revealed discrepancies in labeling and composition, although it did not cover all current RAD-140 products. The known name or declared purity do not confirm the compliance of the formulations, production controls, or clinical usefulness. 4 An analysis of the SARM available on the market reveals a general problem with verification. It does not determine the composition of any specific product without conducting its own tests.

15. Is RAD-140 banned in sports?

Yes. The WADA list of prohibited substances for 2026 includes RAD140 in the SARM and anabolic agents category, which is prohibited at all times. This is a doping classification, separate from national regulations regarding the prescription of drugs and clinical efficacy. Athletes should not assume that the availability of the internet or the „for research” label means that it is permissible to use it. 11 Anti-doping regulations regulate athletes’ eligibility and prohibited substances regardless of national drug regulations. The cited list applies to a specific year and should be checked for relevance later on.

16. Does the receptor mechanism allow to predict the same effect in every tissue?

No. Receptor activity depends on the cellular context and interacting pathways. Studies on breast cancer show how the androgen receptor agonism can be analyzed in the context of inhibiting estrogen-related tumor signaling. This does not confirm the same benefit in other cancers, healthy tissues, or in healthy users. 8 Receptor signaling interacts with cellular gene expression programs and the biology of disease. A similar interaction with the molecular target may therefore lead to different observable results.

17. What evidence would be needed to support broader clinical claims?

Larger claims require controlled human studies in the target population, using clearly identified material and clinically relevant endpoints. Long-term follow-up, systematic reporting of adverse events, and independent replication of results would be important. Existing mechanistic and early oncological observations cannot replace evidence regarding a specific indication. Such studies would have to distinguish objective functional changes from subjective relationships and monitor both frequent and rare harms over an appropriate period.

Applications

RAD-140 is a chemically defined non-steroidal compound belonging to the SARM group, and not a peptide. Studies confirm its biological activity and early research applications in oncology, but leave significant gaps regarding bodybuilding, cognitive function, and long-term off-label use. The molecular identity, product authenticity, clinical benefits, safety, and regulatory status should remain separate issues.

The most important conclusion is the separation of the chemical identity, pharmacological mechanism, and clinical claims. RAD-140 can be correctly identified as an non-steroidal SARM, while at the same time it is considered that the long-term risk issues and applications beyond oncological research remain unresolved. The research history does not support the equivalence of retail products with clinical material, and neither the word „selective” nor the designation „research substance” confirm safety.

In educational reporting, evidence that specifies the actual product, population, comparator group, measured endpoint, duration, and adverse event results are most useful. When these details are lacking, the appropriate conclusion is uncertainty rather than an imagined benefit or general safety assurance.

Educational and medical warnings regarding safety and regulations

This article serves solely for general scientific education and discussion of published research. It does not constitute medical advice, diagnosis, therapeutic recommendation, or support for RAD-140, vozilazarmu (vosilasarm), Testolone, or any product claimed to contain these substances. It does not contain instructions regarding dosage, use cycles, compound combinations, product sourcing, or use in bodybuilding or any other purpose.

RAD-140 is a non-steroidal selective androgen receptor modulator, not a peptide or an approved dietary supplement. The clinical observations described above pertain to specific experimental preparations and specific research populations, including women with advanced breast cancer. They do not confirm safety or efficacy in healthy adults, athletes, adolescents, or individuals with unrelated diseases. The results of laboratory and animal studies should not be considered as confirmed results in humans.

Potential adverse effects, including concerns regarding the liver, require careful interpretation. Small early-phase studies and single case reports do not allow for a full assessment of frequency, severity, or long-term harm profile. Unverified internet-based preparations may differ from the tested molecule in terms of identity, quantity, stereochemistry, purity, formulation, or additional ingredients. The declared analysis certificate (COA) or product label does not in itself confirm clinical usefulness.

Regulatory status varies depending on jurisdiction and may change. References to FDA warnings, clinical trial registration, and the WADA list of prohibited substances for 2026 apply to a specific time and context. Clinical trial registration does not constitute a license to market a drug, and anti-doping classification is not a statement of medical efficacy. In matters of health, medications or suspected adverse effects, readers should use current official regulatory sources and consult with qualified medical personnel. Scientific citations in the article have been retained from the original source material and have not been independently re-verified for this version.

References

1. National Cancer Institute. (n.d.). Vosilasarm. In NCI drug dictionary. Retrieved October 23, 2026, from https://www.cancer.gov/publications/dictionaries/cancer-drug/def/vosilasarm
2. Miller, C. P., Shomali, M., Lyttle, C. R., O’Dea, L. S., Herendeen, H., Gallacher, K., Paquin, D., Compton, D. R., Sahoo, B., Kerrigan, S. A., Burge, M. S., Nickels, M., Green, J. L., Katzenellenbogen, J. A., Tchesnokov, A., & Hattersley, G. (2011). Design, synthesis, and preclinical characterization of the selective androgen receptor modulator (SARM) RAD140. ACS Medicinal Chemistry Letters, 2(2), 124–129. https://doi.org/10.1021/ml1002508
3. Ellipses Pharma. (2026). Phase 1/2 study to evaluate EP0062 as monotherapy and in combination in patients with advanced or metastatic AR+/HER-2-/ER+ breast cancer (NCT05573126) [Clinical trial registration]. ClinicalTrials.gov. Retrieved October 23, 2026, from https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05573126
4. Van Wagoner, R. M., Eichner, A., Bhasin, S., Deuster, P. A., & Eichner, D. (2017). Chemical composition and labeling of substances marketed as selective androgen receptor modulators and sold via the Internet. JAMA, 318(20), 2004–2010. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.17069
5. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (n.d.). FDA warns of use of selective androgen receptor modulators (SARMs) among teens, young adults. Retrieved October 23, 2026, from https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/fda-warns-use-selective-androgen-receptor-modulators-sarms-among-teens-young-adults
6. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (n.d.). PubChem compound summary for CID 44200882, RAD140. Retrieved October 23, 2026, from https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/44200882
7. Jayaraman, A., Christensen, A., Moser, V. A., Vest, R. S., Miller, C. P., Hattersley, G., & Pike, C. J. (2014). Selective androgen receptor modulator RAD140 is neuroprotective in cultured neurons and kainate-lesioned male rats. Endocrinology, 155(4), 1398–1406. https://doi.org/10.1210/en.2013-1725
8. Yu, Z., He, S., Wang, D., Patel, H. K., Miller, C. P., Brown, J. L., Hattersley, G., & Saeh, J. C. (2017). Selective androgen receptor modulator RAD140 inhibits the growth of androgen/estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer models with a distinct mechanism of action. Clinical Cancer Research, 23(24), 7608–7620. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-17-0670
9. LoRusso, P., Hamilton, E., Ma, C., Vidula, N., Bagley, R. G., Troy, S., Annett, M., Yu, Z., Conlan, M. G., & Weise, A. (2022). A first-in-human phase 1 study of a novel selective androgen receptor modulator (SARM), RAD140, in ER+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer. Clinical Breast Cancer, 22(1), 67–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clbc.2021.08.003
10. Ladna, M., Taylor, K., Bhat, A., & Dideban, B. (2023). Idiosyncratic drug-induced liver injury related to use of novel selective androgen receptor modulator RAD140 (Testalone): A case report. Journal of Medical Case Reports, 17(1), 134. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13256-023-03847-8
11. World Anti-Doping Agency. (2025). The 2026 prohibited list: International standard. Retrieved October 23, 2026, from https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/2025-09/2026list_en_final_clean_september_2025.pdf