Skip to main content
SYS · ONLINEPASS · 63.0%
Open Assay
Independent Testing / Est. 2026
BATCH04·26·B
PASS63.0%
N27
PeptidesCosmeticAcetyl Tetrapeptide-11

Acetyl Tetrapeptide-11

/ Synthetic acetylated tetrapeptide; INCI 'Acetyl Tetrapeptide-11'; tenascin-X / dermal density cosmetic peptide
SPECULATIVEN = 0 · TESTING PENDING

ALIAS · Syniorage (trade) · Acetyl Tetrapeptide-11 (INCI)

Pass rate
0
Samples
0
Suppliers
Research use onlyAny dose figures below describe what specific cited studies used, reported factually. Nothing on this page is guidance for human use.READ FIRST →

Terms in this page you can click for a plain-English popup: , , , , , , , .

§ A · Identity
Primary sequence— sequence not captured —
MW · CLASS · Synthetic acetylated tetrapeptide; INCI 'Acetyl Tetrapeptide-11'; tenascin-X / dermal density cosmetic peptideCATEGORY · Cosmetic

Tier 4 cosmeceutical. INCI catalog peptide marketed under the Syniorage trade name (Sederma). Mechanism positioning centres on tenascin-X expression and dermal-density restoration; primary literature outside supplier white papers and INCI catalog material is essentially absent.

§ B · Mechanism of action

The supplier-stated mechanism is upregulation of tenascin-X (TN-X), an extracellular-matrix glycoprotein implicated in dermal collagen organisation and elasticity. The biological rationale draws on the dermal phenotype of TN-X-deficient connective tissue disorders, where loss-of-function presents with skin fragility and laxity. Whether topical application of a four-residue peptide engages this pathway in intact human skin to a clinically meaningful degree is not established in independent peer-reviewed literature.

§ C · Human clinical evidence

None substantive. Supplier white papers and INCI documentation describe in-vitro and small panel observations; no PubMed-indexed primary literature for Acetyl Tetrapeptide-11 specifically is identifiable as of this writing.

§ F · Safety signal

No formal human safety database in the indexed literature. Topical cosmetic use is generally well tolerated per industry surveillance, but the absence of independent published characterisation is a real gap.

§ H · Regulatory status

Regulatory status

FDA status:
Not FDA-approved
§ I · Notable gaps and controversies

The published evidence base is effectively a supplier marketing artefact rather than a peer-reviewed pharmacology corpus. Vendor-formulation product positioning relies on the INCI catalog mechanism narrative; buyers cannot independently verify dermal-density claims against peer-reviewed clinical data.