From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Pharmacology (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Is this available in the US?

Watch for the completion of third stage trials late in 2006. It should become available quickly if approved by the FDA. For now, it is only available to research centers preselected by Palatin Tech.

According to Palatin Technolgies the Phase III testing will not start before second half of 2006. About 30% to 50% of drugs fail in Phase III. If it comes through, approval by the FDA is not expected before 2009.


Bremelanotide is the new name for PT-141. [1]

International availability?[edit]

I was curious to know if Bremelanotide could make it to other countries before or without FDA approval. 02:07, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Sure. As soon as it turns out to work, and gets the publicity and the market, all the internet pharmacies will (claim to) have it. It is a hepta-peptide lactam, which makes it somewhat difficult, but perfectly possible to produce in any semi-professional environment. Producing it is not the problem, making sure it doesn't have strong side-effects is. Denial 19:51, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Removal of a typosquatting site[edit]

Greetings to my fellow editors. Please note that I've removed the typosquatting site "" from this article. This domain is a typosquat of (owned by King Pharmaceuticals partner with Palatin Technologies). Typosquatting is very unethical and as such any site that is engaged in such activity should never be linked from this article. Thanks. (Netscott) 22:53, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Not sure if the site is strictly a 'typosquatter' site... or if it is - and regardless of malicious intent or not - there appear to be other legitimate sites jumping on that same bandwagon... :)
i.e. taking a look at the home page, there are links to articles on MSNBC, ABC News, and an NBC News Affiliate - along with two blogs - which all spell it "Bremolanotide".
Additionally, the " Bremelanotide Bulletin" published on that site has unique updated content about the drug's development. (Google and MSN Live appear to agree, since the site ranks #3 for "Bremelanotide" - right under Palatin Technologies and Wikipedia). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs).
Yes, the fact that other sources are referring to bremelanotide as "bremolanotide" is likely partially stemming from this typosquatting site. Just because this site has managed to Google bomb the word "bremelanotide" with this typosquatted domain and managed to get a decent rank with it doesn't mean that such activity needs to be furthered with a link from Wikipedia. Wikipedia's not to be used for spreading falsehoods. (Netscott) 06:23, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Bremelanotide analogs cause paleness[edit]

Do peptides that occupy the bremelanotide receptor that are a different amino acid sequence cause paleness These could be verified as having arousal effects A lipophobic version of a paleness bremelanotide analog could stay at the body side of the blood brain barrier yet be combined with a lipophilic version of erotic bremelanotide to create a drug that makes people aroused as well as paler

—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:48, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Effective Delivery[edit]

Would it be possible to administer this via aerosol, possibly on a large scale?

IUPAC Name added--ChemSpiderMan (talk) 04:40, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, it likely COULD be dispersed on a large scale like that... but it would be prohibitively expensive and require the people to deeply 'sniff' the vapor. Breathing through the mouth probably wouldn't work. And keep in mind Bremelanotide causes simple arousal, not uncontrollable lust... Shriker (talk) 11:15, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

My understanding was that it actually affected desire. BTW, I last heard that Bremelanotide would be "trialed" (if I can make a verb out if that) in Europe for women, but that due to cost cutting measures, it had to be discontinued. Brian Pearson (talk) 04:43, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Erectile dysfunction drugs[edit]

I don't quite see why this should be categorized in this way. There are literally hundreds of compounds that have sexual (side) effects (most blood pressure meds, for example). Bremelanotide is no different: it has sexual effects, but is not an "Erectile dysfunction drug", never has been and probably never will be. Why should we categorize it as such? The cat says "These drugs are used in the treatment of erectile dysfunction." This is incorrect and therefore misleading. Rockpocket 23:50, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Per User:Cacycle's logic on this partial revert I have adjusted the language of Category:Erectile dysfunction drugs. (talk) 01:44, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
For bremelanotide it is not a rare side effect, it is one of its main and highly reliable effects. Its development has only been stopped because of blood pressure issues and now another compound with the same mechanism of action (MCR4 agonism) will be tested instead. Why do you think that these compounds will never become approved prescription drugs? I think the category text should be changed to something like "Drugs that are active in the treatment of erectile dysfunction." as Wikipedia users would expect to find bremelanotide and related compounds in that category. Cacycle (talk) 01:48, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
I never said "these compounds will never become approved prescription drugs." I said bremelanotide will probably never be an erectile dysfunction drug. Why? Because the company has announced they are no longer pursuing its development as erectile dysfunction drug. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, so whether other variants will or will not be developed in the future is not really relevant.
Its my understanding that our definition of a "drug" should be something that is licensed as such, not just a chemical that has been shown to have bioactive properties. But even if we include compounds under various stages of development and licensing (such as other melanotan derivatives), Bremelanotide specifically is now on track only to be licensed as blood pressure drug. So categorizing as an erectile dysfunction drug is entirely incorrect. It is not. Rockpocket 02:49, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
A drug's legal status has no bearing on what it's pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties are. Just because a drug doesn't have a certain legal status doesn't make it any less of a drug. The melanocortin peptides pharmacokinetic & pharmacodynamic properties are rapidly becoming known and it would be a disservice to in a sense deny what any one of their clinically recognized properties was. (talk) 03:03, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
A drug's regulatory status has a large bearing on the significance of validated pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties. Otherwise where do we draw the line? Do we list every compound that has ever shown, no matter who insignificantly, to have a sexual effect as an erectile dysfunction drug? Thats ridiculous. We need to draw a line somewhere, surely it makes sense to limit the Foo drug category to drugs that are licensed for treating Foo, in development as a Foo drug or widely used off-label or illegally for Foo. Bremelanotide meets none of these criteria. Rockpocket 03:32, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
I think the sum of what you are talking about it "notability". Bremelanotide has a very large amount of notability this ABC News mini-documentary is but one of the more prominent examples of this. Have you checked to see if there was much usage of bremelanotide as an unlicensed drug? (talk) 03:44, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
I haven't, but there is nothing in the article about anyone using the drug for sexual purposes (beyond the unsourced statement "In clinical studies, bremelanotide was shown to be effective in treating male sexual and erectile dysfunction as well as female sexual dysfunction."). It would appear the Phase III trials didn't go ahead, so this can only refer to Phase II trials at best. Do you have any sourced information that it is currently used as an erectile dysfunction drug, legally or otherwise? Rockpocket 03:59, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
The latest information on their website shows development is continuing. Fred Talk 18:24, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
I very much doubt the compound has significant prosexual effects (having reviewed the evidence for and against this hypothesis a while back), but of course it is still a "drug" in the general sense. However, even if I'm wrong about its efficacy, I don't think it can be considered an ED drug in the 'category ED drug' sense. beefman (talk) 07:19, 23 January 2009 (UTC)