Source comparison
MOTS-c Intranasal Research: Delivery Method Comparison
Intranasal 40–60% 15–30 min 3–5:1 Bypassed Fastest CNS delivery, needle-free, enhanced hypothalamic signalling Early-stage (pilot studies) Subcutaneous 70–85% 45–90 min 1:1 30–50% loss Highest absolute bioavailability, established dosing protocols Moderate (an
This comparison does not assign a generated winner or score.
- Intranasal
- 40–60%
- 15–30 min
- 3–5:1
- Bypassed
- Fastest CNS delivery, needle-free, enhanced hypothalamic signalling
- Early-stage (pilot studies)
- Subcutaneous
- 70–85%
- 45–90 min
- 1:1
- 30–50% loss
- Highest absolute bioavailability, established dosing protocols
- Moderate (animal + small human trials)
- Oral (tablet)
- <5%
- N/A
- Negligible
- >95% degradation
- Convenient but impractical due to peptide degradation
- Not viable for peptides
- IV infusion
- ~100%
- Immediate
- Clinical/research gold standard for pharmacokinetics
- Research use only
- Bottom Line
- Intranasal sacrifices 20–30% bioavailability vs injection but delivers peptide to CNS 2× faster without hepatic metabolism. Ideal for metabolic research targeting hypothalamic pathways. Oral delivery is ineffective.