Risuteganib dosage and evidence
Written by Aaron CuhaReviewed Sep 2026
The short answer
Risuteganib is a peptide injected into the eye for dry macular degeneration and for retina swelling caused by diabetes.
Evidence grade for Risuteganib: Moderate. The rule: at least one finished study in people, and at least 100 people who took it. The sum on this page: 2 completed trials, 263 people given it. A grade counts how much has been done to people, not whether it works.
- People given it
- 263
- Human studies
- 2
- Found nothing
- 0
Dose
No human dose established
Amounts that were given in studies sit in Human evidence on this page. None of them is a personal dose.
2 completed trials, 263 people given it
No first-hand reports gathered yet. That is a gap in what we have collected, not a finding that nothing has been reported.
Goal pages: Injury, healing and recovery, Immune system and inflammation, Gut health
In plain English
In plain English, from Aaron
This is how I would explain it to a friend. The evidence, with the numbers, is further down the page.
Risuteganib is a peptide injected into the eye. It was tested for dry macular degeneration, a common cause of vision loss in older people. It was also tested for retina swelling from diabetes. It is not approved anywhere, and work on it has stalled.
What people take it for
- Vision loss from dry macular degeneration.
- Retina swelling from diabetes.
- Longevity or antioxidant stacks, because of cell studies. It has only ever been given to people as a shot into the eye.
What studies in people showed
The biggest study had 218 people with retina swelling from diabetes. The standard drug, bevacizumab, did better. Sight rose 7.0 letters on it and 5.2 letters on the best dose of this drug. The highest dose lost 1.5 letters. In a 45 person study of dry macular degeneration, 48 percent of treated people gained 8 letters on the eye chart. Only 7 percent did after a fake procedure. But the two groups were checked at different times, so that gap is hard to trust. No larger study has been set up since 2019.
What people report
Reports, not study results
The good
- No drug related side effects were reported over 32 weeks in the 45 person study.
The bad
- In the biggest study, sight fell on the highest dose.
- It is a shot into the eye. No side effects in 45 people does not make that proven safe.
Where these come from: From the studies on this page. We have not collected user reports on this one yet.
My bottom line
My opinion: one small eye study with a shaky comparison, and nothing since 2019. It is an eye shot for an eye disease, not an anti-ageing peptide. Leave it to eye doctors and trials.
An opinion, not a finding. I am a coach, not a doctor.
What it has been measured to do
Measured in people
Goals Risuteganib has been tested for in people, biggest studies first. We count only what the studies on this page say, so the real numbers may be higher.
- Eyes and vision218 people · 2 studies
Animal and lab work, not yet tested in people
Real results, but from animals or cells, not people. What works in a mouse often does not work the same way in a person. Nobody can patent this, so nobody would ever earn back the cost of a study in people. That is usually why there is none. The record on this one is set out below.
- Inflammation1 animal or lab study
34 of the 36 indexed goals have no study of any kind behind Risuteganib
No study in people, animals or cells on this page reports a result for these. That does not prove Risuteganib does nothing for them. It does mean anything you have heard about Risuteganib and one of these did not come from a study cited here.
Show full evidence
What is Risuteganib?
Risuteganib is a peptide injected into the eye for dry macular degeneration and for retina swelling caused by diabetes. About 435 people took part in six small and mid-sized studies. In a 45 person dry macular degeneration study, 48 percent of treated people gained 8 letters on the eye chart, against 7 percent after a fake procedure. The two groups were checked at different times, which makes that hard to judge. No large final-stage trial has been registered, and the last study ended in 2019.
Risuteganib is a lab made peptide injected into the eye. It sticks to several integrins. These are proteins on cell surfaces linked to stress damage and bad blood vessel growth in the retina. Allegro Ophthalmics developed it under the code ALG-1001 and the brand Luminate. The targets were diabetic macular oedema (DME), which is swelling in the retina from diabetes, and dry age related macular degeneration (dry AMD). Dry AMD has very few approved treatments.
In people there are six registered studies. All were early or mid-stage, and all finished or were pulled. The biggest had 218 people with DME and compared the drug with bevacizumab (Avastin), a standard eye drug (NCT02348918). The results were posted in 2018 with no formal comparison. At week 24, sight changed by +5.2 letters on 1.0 mg risuteganib, +2.7 on 2.0 mg and -1.5 on 3.0 mg. Bevacizumab gave +7.0 letters. The dry AMD study was published in 2021. It enrolled 45 people and counted 39. 48 percent of treated people gained 8 or more letters on the eye chart at week 28. After a fake procedure, 7 percent did at week 12. So the treated group was checked 16 weeks later than the comparison group. The paper admits this, and it makes the 48 versus 7 figure hard to read. No drug related side effects were reported over 32 weeks. A 2020 review said more data is needed before anyone can judge whether it is worth using.
In a dish, risuteganib protected human retina support cells from damage by hydroquinone and hydrogen peroxide. It also acted differently from bevacizumab in cells carrying mitochondria from people with AMD. No large final-stage trial had been registered as of September 2026. The last study ended in April 2019. Risuteganib is not approved anywhere.
How does Risuteganib work?
In people, nobody has measured how it works. The studies measured eyesight, plus colour vision and fine detail sensitivity as side questions. Nothing ties a change in integrin signals in a human retina to the eyesight results. In a dish, risuteganib sticks to several integrins, not just one. In retina support cells it cut cell death from stress damage. It helped keep the cells' power plants, the mitochondria, working. It also shifted genes tied to cell death, stress damage and swelling. In cells built with mitochondria from AMD donors, it cut signs of cell death where bevacizumab did not. The idea behind trying it in people is this. Integrins sit upstream of both the leaky vessels of DME and the stress damage of dry AMD. That is why one drug was tried for both.
What have studies in people found about Risuteganib?
About 435 people have had risuteganib injected into the eye across six early and mid-stage studies between 2012 and 2019. Only one study, in 45 people, has been published in full. The results of the biggest study exist only as numbers posted on the registry.
- Retina swelling from diabetes, compared with bevacizumab (NCT02348918): 218 people. At week 24, sight changed by +5.2, +2.7 and -1.5 letters on 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0 mg, against +7.0 on bevacizumab. No formal comparison posted, no paper.
- NCT02435862: 105 people with diabetes damage in the retina, testing whether it could separate the eye's inner gel from the retina. Finished 2017, no results posted.
- Dry AMD (2021): 45 people signed up and 39 were counted. 48 percent gained 8 or more letters at week 28 on risuteganib. After a fake procedure, 7 percent did at week 12. The different timing was part of the design. No drug related side effects over 32 weeks.
- NCT02153476: 45 people whose eye gel was stuck to the retina and causing symptoms. Finished 2015, results posted 2018.
- NCT01749891: 25 people with wet AMD, finished 2013, no results posted. NCT01482871: a study in retina swelling from diabetes, pulled before anyone joined.
- Second looks at the 39 dry AMD patients, done afterwards, point to scan features that predicted who improved. They also found leanings toward better colour vision and fine detail sensitivity.
What this does not tell you: The headline 48 versus 7 percent compares the treated group at week 28 with the fake procedure group at week 12. So it does not tell you what the fake group would have looked like at week 28. And 39 eyes are too few to say how big any effect is. In retina swelling from diabetes, the posted numbers favour bevacizumab. They also show sight falling on the highest dose. No analysis says whether any of that is just chance. No study ran longer than 32 weeks. None measured whether the dead patches of dry AMD, called geographic atrophy, kept growing. No large final-stage trial has been registered. No drug related side effects in 45 people does not make a shot into the eye proven safe.
The state of the research
The question here is not whether anyone would pay for studies. The question is why the company that did pay stopped. Allegro Ophthalmics owns the drug and ran six studies. The last finished in April 2019. Since then there have been papers from the dry AMD data, including two second looks at the same 39 patients. There has been no large final-stage trial and no paper on the 218 person DME study. That study's posted numbers favour the older drug. In DME, drugs like bevacizumab set a high bar. Dry AMD has since gained approved drugs that block part of the immune system called complement. A small result from 2019 gets harder to build on each year.
The 2020 review put it plainly. More data is needed before anyone can judge whether to use it. In DME it must show it adds to current treatment. Nothing published since answers either point. The mitochondria work in a dish is real and was paid for in part by the US National Institutes of Health. It is why risuteganib shows up in longevity and antioxidant catalogues. But it is cell work, and the drug has only ever been injected into eyes. There is no data at all on it spreading through the whole body in people.
The evidence, in charts
Fig. 1a · how many people
302people, across 3 studies in people cited here
| Study | People | Share |
|---|---|---|
| NCT02348918, ClinicalTrials.gov, Allegro Ophthalmics 2014 | 218 | 72% |
| NCT03626636, Ophthalmic Surgery, Lasers and Imaging Retina 2021 | 45 | 15% |
| Ophthalmic Surgery, Lasers and Imaging Retina 2022 | 39 | 13% |
One study holds 72% of these people, so the total rests more on one study than its size suggests. Counts are the number of people each study on this page says it signed up. That includes studies that only watched people and gave nobody the compound. 1 more study in people gives no headcount and is not counted here. Studies still signing people up are left out, and only studies cited on this page are counted.
Fig. 1b · evidence mix
4 of 6 sources here are studies in people. The rest are not.
- Study in people · done in people467%
- Lab (cells in a dish) · cells or tissue117%
- Review of studies · sums up other studies117%
Counted from the list of sources on this page. It counts only what we cite, so there may be more studies out there. A review counts once, however many studies it sums up.
Fig. 2 · evidence over time
The studies cover 4 different years, 2014 to 2022, counted from the list of sources on this page.
Fig. 3 · legal status at a glance
US
Not approved
UK
Not approved
AU
Not approved
CA
Not approved
Not approved in any of the four countries shown. This is what the law says, not a verdict on the science. See Legal status below for the full text and any notes.
Fig. 4 · how much does what
Nobody has tested different amounts in people
This chart would show how the effect changes as the amount goes up. For this compound, nobody has measured that in people. So we leave it empty. We will not borrow an animal chart and pretend it works the same in people.
Fig. 5 · what the molecule is
- Kind of compound
- Peptide
- Molecule weight
- Not on file
- Half-life
- None on file
- Chain length
- None on file
No amino acid sequence is on file for Risuteganib, so none is drawn rather than guessed from a name.
The studies we cite
- Study in people2021Safety and Efficacy of Intravitreal Risuteganib for Non-Exudative AMD: A Multicenter, Phase 2a, Randomized, Clinical Trial
A small eye trial reported a gain in vision, and the way it was measured makes that gain hard to trust. Forty five people with dry macular degeneration got either an injection into the eye or a fake procedure. Far more of the treated group could read extra lines on the chart. The two groups were checked at different points in time, by design, so they were never compared on equal footing. Nothing harmful was linked to the drug over eight months. The maker paid.
45 people with dry AMD and vision between 20/40 and 20/200 randomised to 1.0 mg intravitreal risuteganib (29) or sham (16); 39 completed. Primary endpoint, a gain of 8 or more ETDRS letters, was met by 48 percent of the risuteganib arm at week 28 versus 7 percent of the sham arm at week 12. The two arms were measured at different times by design. No drug related adverse events in 32 weeks. Developer funded; the registered trial (NCT03626636) lists 42 participants.
- Study in people2014Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial of Luminate as Compared to Avastin in the Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema (NCT02348918)
Put head to head against a standard eye drug, this one came off worse. Two hundred and eighteen people with swelling in the retina from diabetes were split across nine groups. After six months, sight had improved most in the group given the standard drug. The best risuteganib dose did less, and the highest dose left people slightly worse than when they started. The company posted the figures but never compared them formally and never published a paper. The company paid.
218 participants with DME across nine arms. Posted results (December 2018): mean change in best corrected visual acuity at week 24 of +5.2 letters (1.0 mg), +2.7 (2.0 mg) and -1.5 (3.0 mg) with risuteganib, versus +7.0 with bevacizumab. No statistical comparison posted and no journal publication located. Sponsor funded.
- Study in people2022Impact of Baseline Quantitative OCT Features on Response to Risuteganib for the Treatment of Dry Age-Related Macular Degeneration: The Importance of Outer Retinal Integrity
This is a second look at the same thirty nine people, done after the trial ended. It asked which eyes had improved, and the answer was the eyes in better shape to begin with. Those with more surviving retina gained the most lines on the chart. The authors suggest picking patients like this for future trials. Looking for patterns after the results are in can turn up almost anything. Treat this as a hint, not a finding. Public money paid for the analysis.
Post hoc analysis of the 39 completers of the phase 2a. Eyes with more intact ellipsoid zone, thicker outer retina and less geographic atrophy at baseline were more likely to gain 8 letters. Exploratory, and proposed by the authors as a way to enrich future trials. NIH supported analysis.
- Study in people2022Color Vision and Microperimetry Changes in Nonexudative Age-Related Macular Degeneration After Risuteganib Treatment: Exploratory Endpoints in a Multicenter Phase 2a Trial
Extra measurements from the same thirty nine people, taken as side questions rather than the main one. Colour vision and fine detail sensitivity both leaned towards improvement. Two of the measures came out clearly enough to call. These were side questions in a trial too small to settle the main one. Measure enough things and some will look good by chance. Treat this as a reason to look again, not as evidence the drug works.
Exploratory endpoints from the same 39 patients. Colour vision and microperimetry measures trended toward improvement; two of the metrics reached statistical significance. Exploratory analyses of a 39 person trial.
- Review of studies2020Risuteganib, a novel integrin inhibitor for the treatment of non-exudative (dry) age-related macular degeneration and diabetic macular edema
A review of the early and mid-stage study results. The reviewer says more data is needed before anyone can judge whether the drug is worth using. For retina swelling from diabetes, it would need to show it adds something to current treatments, especially when those have failed.
Narrative review of the phase 1 and 2 data. The expert opinion section states that more data are needed before the benefits of adopting risuteganib can be evaluated, and that in DME it must show it adds to existing treatments, especially in refractory disease.
- Lab (cells in a dish)2021Differential effects of risuteganib and bevacizumab on AMD cybrid cells
In a dish. Retina support cells were made with mitochondria from 5 people with AMD and 3 without. They were treated with each drug for 48 hours at doses like those used in the eye. The AMD cells showed more signs of cell death at the start. The two drugs changed cell death, stress and swelling genes in different ways. This is cell work only. Public and charity money paid.
Retinal pigment epithelial cybrid cell lines carrying mitochondria from 5 AMD and 3 normal donors treated with clinical dose equivalents of each drug for 48 hours. AMD cybrids had higher baseline caspase activity; the two drugs produced different patterns of apoptosis, oxidative stress and inflammation gene expression. Cell work only. NIH and foundation funded.
Where to buy Risuteganib
No seller we track lists Risuteganib yet. We read sellers’ public product lists every week, and this section fills in as soon as one does. Every seller, graded
Common questions
Has Risuteganib been tested in people?
Yes. 263 people given it across 2 completed trials cited here, 0 of which found nothing. Risuteganib is a peptide injected into the eye for dry macular degeneration and for retina swelling caused by diabetes.
What is the Risuteganib dosage?
No human dose established. Amounts that were given in studies sit in Human evidence on this page. None of them is a personal dose. 2 completed trials, 263 people given it
Is Risuteganib FDA-approved?
Not FDA approved. Mid-stage studies only. No final-stage study registered. The latest study finished in April 2019.
Does risuteganib improve vision in dry AMD?
In a 45 person study, 48 percent of treated eyes gained 8 or more letters on the eye chart at week 28. After a fake procedure, 7 percent did, but they were checked at week 12. The different timing was built into the design, and only 39 eyes were counted. That is worth a bigger study. No bigger study has been registered.
How did it compare with Avastin in diabetic macular oedema?
In the 218 person study posted on ClinicalTrials.gov, sight at week 24 rose 5.2 letters on 1.0 mg and 7.0 letters on bevacizumab (Avastin). The higher risuteganib doses did worse. The 3.0 mg group lost 1.5 letters. No formal comparison was posted, and the study was never published.
Is there a phase 3?
No. As of September 2026 no large final-stage trial of risuteganib is registered. The last study of any kind finished in April 2019.
Why is an eye drug in a longevity catalogue?
Because of studies in a dish. In those, it protected retina support cells from stress damage and changed signs of how their mitochondria work. Risuteganib has only ever been given to people as a shot into the eye. There is no human data on any whole body or anti-ageing use.