Skip to content
PeptideAI
In vitro onlylongevityimmuneinflammation

Livagen

Liver-directed tetrapeptide that is best known not for anything hepatic but for the striking cell-culture finding that it decondenses tightly packed chromatin in lymphocytes from elderly donors.

Also known as Lys-Glu-Asp-Ala, KEDA, liver Cytogen, Livagen tetrapeptide, Livagen

In vitro only — Cell or tissue studies. A mechanism, not yet an effect in a living body.

The evidence that gives Livagen its reputation is cell-culture work on lymphocytes from elderly donors showing chromatin decondensation and reactivation of ribosomal genes. That is a real and interesting finding, but it is in a dish, from one collaborating group, and it says nothing about what an injected or swallowed dose does in a person. There are no human trials.

How it works

Livagen is Lys-Glu-Asp-Ala. The most-cited work on it, from Lezhava's group in collaboration with Khavinson, incubated lymphocytes from donors aged 76-80 with the peptide and reported decondensation of pericentromeric heterochromatin and reactivation of nucleolar organiser regions - in plain terms, silenced ribosomal genes started transcribing again. Structurally the peptide is a plausible major-groove DNA binder given its charge distribution. The liver targeting in the marketing comes from the Cytogen naming convention rather than from hepatic-specific data; the actual published work is chromatin biology, not hepatology.

Targets: Heterochromatin, Nucleolar organiser regions, Ribosomal gene expression

Dosing

ProtocolDoseFrequencyRoute
Research-market injectable courseAny time of day.1 mg – 2 mgonce daily for 10 to 20 dayssubcutaneous
Oral capsule courseUsually taken before food.1 mg – 2 mgonce daily for 20 to 30 daysoral
  • · The de facto standard on the vial market. There is no dose-finding study behind it.
  • · Khavinson's claim that these peptides survive gut passage intact is central to the whole capsule business and has never been demonstrated by an independent pharmacokinetic study.

Cycling

Ten to twenty days injectable, or twenty to thirty days oral, then a break of three to six months.

Work out your exact syringe units →

Pharmacology

Half-life
Not measured. A free tetrapeptide is cleared by serum peptidases within minutes.
Onset
No acute effect. Any claimed benefit is framed over a full 10-20 day course.
Routes
subcutaneous, oral, intramuscular
Molecule
Synthetic tetrapeptide
Sequence length
4 amino acids
Molecular weight
461.5 Da

Handling

Diluent
Bacteriostatic water
Typical mix
2 or 3 mL
Vial sizes
20 mg
Lyophilised
Room temperature short term; fridge or freezer for long-term storage.
Reconstituted
Refrigerated, use within about 30 days.
Light sensitive
Yes — keep it out of the light

Mixing

20 mg in 2 mL gives 10 mg/mL; 1 mg is 10 units on a U-100 insulin syringe.

Side effects

  • commonInjection-site irritation— Transient.
  • commonNo consistent systemic side effects reported— Based on very limited exposure data.

Do not use if

  • Active malignancy - a compound whose signature effect is de-repressing silenced genes is not something to run alongside an active cancer.
  • Pregnancy and breastfeeding - no data.

Combining it

  • synergyepitalon — Commonly stacked in longevity protocols; both are proposed chromatin-level regulators, so the combination is speculative rather than demonstrated.
  • redundantsvetinorm — Svetinorm is the liver Cytomax extract covering the same claimed territory.

What to monitor

  • · If you are using it for the liver claim, a liver panel before and after a course is the only way to know anything.
  • · No other routine monitoring is established.

Legal status

Not approved for human use in the US, UK or EU; sold as a research chemical or as a supplement capsule in Russia and Eastern Europe.

References

  • Lezhava, Monaselidze, Jokhadze & Khavinson, chromatin decondensation by Livagen in lymphocytes of elderly donors (Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine) (preclinical)
  • Ashapkin, Linkova, Khavinson & Vanyushin, epigenetic mechanisms of peptidergic regulation of gene expression during aging (Biochemistry Moscow) (review)

Mechanism in depth

Livagen is the compound where the epigenetic claim was actually measured rather than modelled, and the measurement is more interesting than the marketing. Khavinson and Lezhava's Tbilisi collaboration took lymphocytes from donors in their late seventies and incubated them with the peptide, then looked at four things: ribosomal gene activity, the thermal denaturation profile of heterochromatin, structural C-heterochromatin polymorphism, and facultative heterochromatin variability. Livagen activated ribosomal genes, decondensed pericentromeric structural heterochromatin, and released euchromatic genes that had been silenced by age-related condensation. In plain terms, chromatin that had packed itself shut with age opened up and started transcribing. That is a specific, physically measured result using microcalorimetry and cytogenetics, not a docking simulation, and it is the reason Livagen has a reputation out of all proportion to its liver branding. What it does not do is tell you anything hepatic. There is no hepatocyte study, no liver enzyme data, no toxic-injury model. The liver label comes from the Cytogen naming convention - each synthetic tetrapeptide was assigned to the tissue its parent extract came from - and Livagen's parent is the liver Cytomax Svetinorm. The published biology is chromatin biology in lymphocytes. Anyone selling this for fatty liver is selling the name, not the data. Mechanistically it sits with the rest of the class: charged short peptide, no receptor, proposed major-groove DNA binding at specific base-pair blocks, supported by Fedoreyeva's demonstration that peptides of this size reach the nucleus and discriminate between nucleotide sequences.

What usually goes wrong

The failure specific to Livagen is buying it for the wrong organ. People with a fatty liver diagnosis and raised GGT run courses of this, feel virtuous, and defer the intervention that would actually work. The published biology is about lymphocyte chromatin; there is no hepatic dataset at all. The second issue is the theoretical one that should give anyone pause: the compound's signature effect is de-repressing genes that the cell had deliberately silenced. In an ageing cell that is framed as rejuvenation. In a cell with an oncogene under heterochromatic silencing it is framed differently, and nobody has looked. That is speculative in both directions, which is exactly why active malignancy is a hard contraindication rather than a soft one. Third, the same dose gap as the rest of the class: microgram-range doses in the source literature, milligram-range doses on the vial market, no bridging study.

Bloodwork worth running

MarkerWhenWhy it matters
Full liver panel - ALT, AST, GGT, ALP, bilirubin, albuminBaseline before the course and six weeks after the last dose. Six weeks matters - ALT has a half-life measured in days and a two-week retest is noise.Not because Livagen has been shown to change it, but because most people take this compound for the liver claim and this is the only way to find out that nothing happened. That is a genuinely useful result.Act if: If ALT or GGT is raised at baseline, the correct action is to find out why - alcohol, metabolic fatty liver, medication, viral hepatitis - not to run peptide courses at a number. Persistent ALT above roughly twice the upper limit needs a diagnosis, not a supplement.
CBC with differentialBaseline and four weeks post-course.The published work is entirely about lymphocyte chromatin, so lymphocytes are the tissue the compound has actually been shown to touch. This will not detect chromatin decondensation, but it is the only routine test aimed at the right cell.Act if: No expected change. Any significant shift needs its own explanation.

Pharmacokinetics

Metabolism
Sequential aminopeptidase cleavage to lysine, glutamate, aspartate and alanine. No identified metabolite with independent activity.
Elimination
Renal filtration of fragments; amino acids re-enter the general pool.

Receptor targets

  • Pericentromeric structural heterochromatin — No binding constant published

    Decondensation in lymphocytes from donors aged roughly 76-80, measured by thermal denaturation and cytogenetic polymorphism. This is the signature Livagen result.

  • Nucleolar organiser regions / ribosomal genes

    Reactivation of transcription of ribosomal genes that had been silenced with age - the readout that makes the chromatin claim functional rather than structural.

  • Facultative and euchromatic silenced regions

    Release of genes repressed by age-related condensation, described as de-heterochromatinisation.

  • No identified receptor and no hepatic target — None published

    There is no receptor, and despite the name there is no published hepatocyte, liver enzyme or liver injury data for this peptide.

What to expect, and when

There is no acute effect and there is no subjective effect. Days one to twenty: nothing but injection-site irritation. Weeks four to six after a course: the only window where a liver panel retest is meaningful, and the expected result is no change. Months: nothing observable. This is a compound you take on a theory and cannot verify by feel, which is worth saying plainly, because a user expecting to notice something will manufacture the sensation.

Stacking and comparisons

Livagen plus Epitalon is the standard longevity pairing and it is entirely speculative - two peptides proposed to act on chromatin, stacked on the theory that two epigenetic levers beat one. There is no combination study. Livagen plus Svetinorm is duplication: Svetinorm is the liver Cytomax and Livagen is its synthetic descendant, so running both is paying twice for one claim. If the actual goal is liver health, the honest stack is not peptide-based at all: TUDCA, weight loss, alcohol reduction and treating the underlying cause have outcome data that this compound does not approach.

Against Epitalon: same class, same proposed mechanism, and Epitalon has the telomerase and human-cell division-limit work plus far more user data. Livagen has the better-measured chromatin result - microcalorimetry and cytogenetics on real elderly human lymphocytes - but far less attention. Against Svetinorm: the synthetic has defined chemistry and a real published experiment; the extract has neither. Against TUDCA for liver: not comparable. TUDCA has human data on hepatic endpoints; Livagen has none and is not a liver drug regardless of what the label says.

Rough cost

$35–$110/month. One 20 mg vial is one full course at the vial-market protocol. Two to three courses a year rather than continuous use. Indicative research-chemical pricing, not verified against vendor listings in this session.

Genuinely uncertain

  • No pharmacokinetic data at all in humans or animals by any route.
  • There is no hepatic study of Livagen - no hepatocyte culture, no liver enzyme data, no injury model. The liver designation is naming convention.
  • The chromatin work is in vitro incubation of donor lymphocytes; nothing establishes that an injected or swallowed dose reaches lymphocyte nuclei in vivo at an effective concentration.
  • Oral absorption of an intact tetrapeptide has no established transporter and has never been demonstrated.
  • Whether de-repressing age-silenced chromatin is net beneficial or net risky in a person with any pre-malignant lesion is completely uncharacterised.
  • The microgram-versus-milligram dosing gap between the source literature and the vial market is unresolved.
  • No human trial of any kind exists for this compound.
  • Cost figures are indicative research-chemical estimates and were not verified against live vendor listings in this session.

Papers