Vasoactive intestinal research peptide · Fact sheet

Aviptadil

Also known as Vasoactive intestinal peptide · VIP · Synthetic VIP

Aviptadil is synthetic vasoactive intestinal peptide. A larger COVID-19 respiratory-failure trial did not improve clinical outcomes and stopped for futility, despite earlier signals on secondary measures.

InvestigationalModerate human evidence

What is Aviptadil?

VIP is a naturally occurring signaling peptide with vascular, intestinal and immune-related actions.

Intravenous, inhaled and combination products have different exposure and evidence; this entry focuses on respiratory research.

Benefits & claims

Interest centers on lung-protective mechanisms and severe respiratory failure. Mechanistic effects do not establish survival benefit.

What the evidence supports

  • The smaller trial reported secondary survival and biomarker signals after a negative primary comparison.
  • The larger TESICO result did not confirm a clinical benefit.
  • Neither result establishes a general immune, breathing or long-COVID regimen.
Research areas
  • COVID-19 acute hypoxemic respiratory failure
  • VIP-related pulmonary mechanisms

Dosage & frequency

Human study context

TESICO used a monitored ICU infusion regimen; it was not effective on the primary clinical comparison.

TESICO aviptadil comparison

Hospitalized adults with confirmed COVID-19 and acute hypoxemic respiratory failure within four days of onset

Amount
Target daily totals of 600, 1,200 and 1,800 pmol/kg on days one, two and three, respectively
Frequency
A 12-hour infusion each day for three days
Route studied or labeled
Intravenous specialist infusion

These are picomole-per-kilogram daily totals, not milligram boluses or an inhaled schedule. Infusion adjustment and monitoring rules are omitted. The primary 90-day outcome did not improve versus placebo.

How to read these amounts

An approved regimen belongs to a specific product, indication, and population. A study regimen describes what researchers tested; it does not establish a prescription or a safe self-use protocol. Products, routes, and formulations are not interchangeable. A prescriber uses the full label and individual clinical circumstances.

Personal accounts may describe amounts, schedules and outcomes beyond clinical research. They do not establish a regimen. Read the reported experiences

Formulations, interactions & practical context

Formulation differences

  • Intravenous, inhaled and combination products have different exposure and evidence; this entry focuses on respiratory research.

Interactions & precautions

  • The reviewed sources do not establish a comprehensive human interaction profile for this exact substance or combination.

What is still unresolved

  • Benefit in other respiratory conditions or formulations
  • Meaningful outcomes beyond mechanistic markers
  • Long-term and non-hospital safety

Side effects & risks

  • Critically ill trial participants had high rates of serious events in both groups; those rates cannot be transferred to healthy people.
  • Vasoactive pharmacology and infusion-related tolerability require direct monitoring; other routes need separate safety evidence.

This is a summary of the cited evidence, not a complete product label. A lack of human safety data does not establish safety.

Clinical research

Moderate human evidence

The earlier 196-person trial missed its primary endpoint. TESICO analyzed 461 infused participants and found no significant 90-day clinical improvement or mortality advantage.

Personal experiences

Reports describe what someone noticed. They cannot establish cause, typical results, or how often a side effect happens. Amounts and schedules describe the individual account, not an effective or safe dose. Product identity and strength may be unverified, and missing details are left explicit.

No attributable personal accounts were found in the sources reviewed.

Approval status

Aviptadil has no FDA-approved respiratory treatment. The cited TESICO aviptadil comparison stopped for futility; this does not establish that every VIP research program ended.

Open questions

  • Benefit in other respiratory conditions or formulations
  • Meaningful outcomes beyond mechanistic markers
  • Long-term and non-hospital safety

Summary

Neither result establishes a general immune, breathing or long-COVID regimen.

Sources

Medical evidence and regulatory sources are listed here. Personal reports are linked separately in the experiences section.

  1. clinical trialsTESICO study NCT04843761

    Official registry for the respiratory-failure trial.

How we assess sources · Suggest a correction