The comparison runs the other way for once
The standard shape of these pages is a research compound set beside the prescription route it does not have. No approved product, no label, no prescriber, no pharmacy, and a research chemical filling the gap.
Tesamorelin inverts that. There is an approved product, a licence number, a named holder and a pharmacy route. The interesting question is therefore not whether a prescription exists, but what it is a prescription for.
What was approved, and by whom
The FDA approved tesamorelin under biologics licence application BLA 022505, held by Theratechnologies. It is marketed as EGRIFTA, latterly EGRIFTA SV, and supplied as a prescription powder for reconstitution.
Around 24 studies are registered on ClinicalTrials.gov under the name. Compared with the compounds usually discussed here, where the honest count is zero or one record of doubtful provenance, that is a substantial programme.
The indication is one sentence, and it is specific
The approved indication is the reduction of excess abdominal fat in HIV-infected adult patients with lipodystrophy.
The same section carries a limitation of use: long-term cardiovascular safety has not been established, and prescribers are directed to weigh risk and benefit in patients who have not had a reduction in visceral adipose tissue.
That is the whole authorisation. It is not a statement about body composition in healthy adults, about recovery, or about ageing, and the marketing that surrounds the compound in research-chemical channels concerns almost entirely those other things.
What that means for a chart
A tesamorelin dosage chart restating approved quantities has something no chart for BPC-157 or MOTS-c can have: a regulator signed off on the numbers, and somebody was accountable for the conclusion.
The limit is that the approval is attached to the indication rather than to the molecule. Quantities established in HIV-associated lipodystrophy, for reduction of visceral fat, were studied in that setting. Carried across to a different population and a different goal they become an extrapolation, and a table renders both identically.
So the check on any chart for this compound is not arithmetic. It is whether the chart names the population the numbers came from, and whether it distinguishes the approved product from research-chemical material whose labelled mass nobody verified.