PEDEvidence

ER-100

What it is & what research shows

Reference overview

ER-100 is an investigational therapy using controlled expression of OCT4, SOX2 and KLF4 to investigate restoration of function in retinal cells. It is a gene-based therapy, not an oral longevity supplement. A first-in-human phase 1 program addresses optic neuropathies, including open-angle glaucoma and non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy. Initial dosing was announced in June 2026. [1.1][1.2]

Animal visual-function results are the rationale for human testing, not proof of human age reversal. The initial study focuses on safety and visual function. It does not establish whole-body rejuvenation, lifespan extension or long-term safety. A source-linked study result with a verified dose and schedule is not yet available in this overview. This is a gap in this page, not a claim that no research exists. [2.1][2.2]

Studied methods, not dosing advice. Selected evidence, not a complete literature review or formal quality appraisal.
Sources & reading scope

Study-summary coverage

No completed study summaries are linked to this compound page yet. This is a coverage gap on PED Evidence, not evidence that human studies or other research do not exist.

Filter, save and compare ER-100 studies →

Original papers, trial registrations and sponsor disclosures are labeled separately. Multiple links may describe the same study.

Sources checked September 24, 2026.

More about ER-100: identity, safety & reference details
BiologicLongevity
Primary research area
Emerging research
Regulatory status
Research status varies
Evidence level
Evidence level not yet characterized
Primary mechanism
Mechanism not yet characterized
Reference profile available · Coverage varies by section

Also known as ER100

Start with the research

An outcome-specific synthesis has not been prepared for this compound. This is a coverage gap, not evidence that it has no effect.

Open studies and trial records
Uses & research

A first-in-human phase 1 program addresses optic neuropathies, including open-angle glaucoma and non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy. Initial dosing was announced in June 2026. [1][2]

Known half-life

No source-verified value in this profile yet. A treatment schedule or duration of an effect is not a drug half-life.

Half-life describes how quickly the measured drug concentration falls by half. It does not set a dosing interval.
Evidence & important limits

Animal visual-function results are the rationale for human testing, not proof of human age reversal. The initial study focuses on safety and visual function. It does not establish whole-body rejuvenation, lifespan extension or long-term safety. [1][2]

Safety & evidence boundaries

Source-specific information, not a personal safety clearance or monitoring plan.

Animal visual-function results are the rationale for human testing, not proof of human age reversal. The initial study focuses on safety and visual function. It does not establish whole-body rejuvenation, lifespan extension or long-term safety.

Explore safety questions by system

These are literature filters, not claims that this compound causes each effect. A keyword match is not a confirmed adverse reaction.

Interactions, rare harms, long-term effects and reversibility require separate evidence. Do not infer they are absent when the sources here do not address them.

Identity, names & formulations

Canonical compound: ER-100 · er100

Searchable names: ER100

Names share a parent research page. Different esters, salts, routes and brands are not assumed to have the same half-life, indication or exposure.

Combination evidence stays attached to the studied combination. It is not automatically assigned to each ingredient.

Understand the evidence types

Read the model and design first, then the population, outcome and limitations. These categories describe evidence, not a best-compound ranking.

Randomized human trials
Compare assigned interventions. Randomization does not by itself establish low bias or relevance to every population.
Controlled human studies
Use a comparison group; allocation and confounding still matter.
Prospective human research
Follows participants forward. It may be observational or interventional, so this is not a separate quality grade.
Observational human research
Describes associations. Confounding can explain differences.
Case reports and series
Useful for unusual events and safety signals, not reliable rates or effect sizes.
Animal research
Can test biology and function in a living model. Human exposure, benefit and safety remain separate questions.
Cell and tissue research
Tests responses in a preparation, including human-derived cells. It is not a human participant trial.
Mechanistic and computational evidence
Helps explain or predict a pathway; predictions need experimental and clinical testing.
Anecdotal reports
Self-reported experiences can generate questions. Product identity, selection bias and other interventions may be uncontrolled.

Systematic reviews synthesize studies and depend on their quality. Preprint status and abstract versus full-paper reading are separate labels. Citation popularity measures attention, not reliability. A study summary is not a formal quality appraisal.

Sources for this profile

  1. 1. ER-100: first-in-human optic neuropathy trial Trial registration · Study design and any posted results; registration does not establish treatment benefit.
  2. 2. First participant dosed: June 2026 Sponsor report · Clinical entry and animal rationale; does not report human rejuvenation efficacy.

Reference facts checked 2026-09-24. Source scope is listed above; this is not a formal quality appraisal. See each label for full prescribing information.

Browse all studies

Study model describes the source. Confidence depends on methods, replication, population and outcome.

Loading compound research…

Common questions about ER-100