GHK-Cu
Properties
| Full name | glycyl-L-histidyl-L-lysine copper(II) | source |
|---|---|---|
| Inci name | Copper Tripeptide-1 | source |
| Cas number | 89030-95-5 | source |
| Unii | 6BJQ43T1I9 | source |
| Molecular formula | C14H22N6O4.Cu (equivalently C14H22CuN6O4) | source |
| Molecular weight | 401.91 g/mol | source |
| Appearance | Crystallised from aqueous copper(II) acetate with ethanol it forms dark purple-blue octahedral crystals; in column purification the complex is collected as the elution peak absorbing at 600 nm. Stated under the cosmetic safety review's Method of Manufacture heading for copper tripeptide-1, so it describes the copper complex rather than the uncomplexed peptide. The underlying source is Pickart and Lovejoy, Methods in Enzymology 1987. | source |
| Solubility | Highly hydrophilic. Octanol / phosphate-buffered-saline distribution coefficients (log D) measured between -2.38 and -2.49 across the pH range 4.5 to 7.4. | source |
| Storage | This is an accelerated stability finding, not a handling instruction. Under forced-degradation testing the complex remained stable in water and in pH 4.5 to 7.4 buffers held at 60 degrees C for at least two weeks, while basic and oxidative stressors, and to a lesser extent acidic stress, caused hydrolytic cleavage with first-order degradation profiles. A 60 degrees C challenge is a stress condition used to measure degradation kinetics; it is not a holding temperature, and the published literature does not establish one. | source |
| Cosmetic function | Skin conditioning agent. The cosmetic safety review assigns this function collectively to the ingredients it covers, copper tripeptide-1 among them, rather than determining it for copper tripeptide-1 individually. | source |
| Cosmetic use concentration | The cosmetic safety review states typical use concentrations of less than 10 ppm. That figure is given collectively for the ingredients the review covers and traces to an industry submission describing customary use for peptides generally; it is not a measurement specific to copper tripeptide-1. | source |
| Surveyed use concentration range | A Personal Care Products Council survey conducted in 2013 and updated in 2014 reported use concentrations ranging from 0.0000001% to 0.002% across the peptide ingredients covered by the review. The range is collective across those ingredients rather than specific to copper tripeptide-1, and the upper figure relates to leave-on products. | source |
| Starting material purity | This figure describes tripeptide-1 (GHK), the uncomplexed peptide GHK-Cu is made from, and not GHK-Cu itself. Under its Composition/Impurities heading for tripeptide-1 (GHK), the cosmetic safety review describes commercial glycyl-L-histidyl-L-lysine as approximately 95% pure, often including small amounts of mildly neurotoxic material that can be reduced by dissolution in glass-distilled water, centrifugation, and lyophilisation of the supernatant. That review's Composition/Impurities section carries no entry for copper tripeptide-1. Its later summary section does restate the figure as applying to GHK-Cu2+, contradicting its own body text; the body attribution is the one followed here. The underlying source is Pickart and Lovejoy, Methods in Enzymology 1987. | source |
| Safety review | The Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel concluded that copper tripeptide-1 is safe in the present practices of use and concentration in cosmetics. | source |
| Plasma concentration | Reported at about 200 ng/mL of plasma at age 20, declining to about 80 ng/mL by age 60. Figures are from a narrative review, not from a primary measurement study. | source |
What the research does not show
- No large, independent, placebo-controlled trial has measured what GHK-Cu does to the appearance of human facial skin. The human work cited here is small, or applies formulations containing several active ingredients at once.
- The human wrinkle trials reported in the cosmetic safety review were conducted on palmitoyl tripeptide-1, a different, fatty-acylated ingredient. They are not measurements of GHK-Cu, and nothing in them transfers to it.
- In the one randomised human comparison published on CO2 laser-resurfaced skin, blinded evaluators and computer image analysis found no significant difference between the GHK-Cu regimen and the control regimen for redness, wrinkles, or overall skin quality. Only the patients' own satisfaction ratings differed.
- The other published human report on facial appearance is a single-patient case in which copper-GHK was delivered together with four other actives by a resurfacing device, so nothing in it can be attributed to copper-GHK on its own.
- The mechanistic literature cited here is cell-culture or rodent work rather than human skin. It describes what the molecule does to cells in a dish or to a rat, not what a cosmetic does on a face.
- Review articles summarise and interpret existing work; they do not generate new evidence. Several values on this site are drawn from a cosmetic safety review or a narrative review rather than from the primary study behind them.
- The human skin-permeation data cited here come from in vitro diffusion cells using excised skin under infinite-dose conditions. That does not establish how much copper crosses intact living skin from a normal cosmetic application.
- The purity figure carried in the cosmetic safety review describes tripeptide-1 (GHK), the uncomplexed peptide GHK-Cu is made from, not GHK-Cu itself; that review's Composition/Impurities section carries no entry for copper tripeptide-1 at all. See the starting material purity entry, which sets out the discrepancy in full. The literature reviewed here therefore reports no purity figure for commercial GHK-Cu, and none for any individual supplier or lot, which is what a lot-specific certificate of analysis is for.
- The expert-panel safety conclusion for copper tripeptide-1 is stated for the present practices of use and concentration described in that review. It does not extend to concentrations outside the ones surveyed there.
- The published research does not establish an optimal topical concentration, vehicle, or frequency for appearance outcomes in people.
- Published work does not establish how long any change in the appearance of skin persists once use stops, nor whether outcomes differ by skin type, age, or sex.
Storage and handling
This is an accelerated stability finding, not a handling instruction. Under forced-degradation testing the complex remained stable in water and in pH 4.5 to 7.4 buffers held at 60 degrees C for at least two weeks, while basic and oxidative stressors, and to a lesser extent acidic stress, caused hydrolytic cleavage with first-order degradation profiles. A 60 degrees C challenge is a stress condition used to measure degradation kinetics; it is not a holding temperature, and the published literature does not establish one. source
Concentration calculator · Research index · Reading a certificate of analysis