Digestery
Longevity supplements › NMN and Aging › Studies

Randomized trial · measured lab tests or safety

A 6-week NR trial in healthy adults: well tolerated, higher NAD+ markers

Martens and colleagues · Nature communications · 2018

Original title: Chronic nicotinamide riboside supplementation is well-tolerated and elevates NAD+ in healthy middle-aged and older adults.

Under review. A person has not yet checked this summary against the paper. It is written from the PubMed abstract. Until a person checks it, search engines are asked not to list this page.

What the study found

Points to benefit

NR was well tolerated and raised NAD+ metabolism. The abstract gives no numbers on health effects and suggests future trials should look at blood pressure and artery stiffness.

The study at a glance

Type of study
Randomized trial
Who or what was studied
Healthy middle-aged and older adults
What was tested
NR vs placebo, 6 weeks each in turn (crossover)
What it measured
Lab tests or markers
How long
6 weeks
Who has a stake
No stake declared
No competing interests declared.
Journal
Nature communications, 2018
Source
PubMed record 29599478. This page is based on the abstract only.

How much this study counts

  • ✓Randomized: people were put into groups by chance, so the groups start out alike.
  • ✓Compared with a placebo, a dummy treatment.
  • •The abstract does not say how many people took part.
  • –Short: 6 weeks. Longer-term effects are unknown.
  • –Measured lab tests or markers, which stand in for aging and age-related decline. A better marker does not always mean better health.
  • ✓No competing interests declared.
  • •Summarized from the PubMed abstract only. The full paper may hold details the abstract leaves out.

✓ Strength– Limit• Note

These points come from fixed rules about the type of study, its size and length, what it measured, and who has a stake. Every study on Digestery gets the same rules.

Where this study sits

Each dot is one on-topic paper on this question. Steps near the top answer the question more directly.

↑ Stronger evidence

  1. Trials in people: aging and age-related decline

    0

    Not done yet. This is the step that would answer the question.

  2. Trials in people: other measures

    9

    3 benefit, 2 mixed, 4 no difference

  3. Trials in people: lab tests or safety

    7

    4 benefit, 1 mixed, 2 no difference

    ↑ This study is the ringed dot

  4. Population studies

    0

    None among the papers we read.

  5. Blood levels and genes

    0

    None among the papers we read.

  6. Animals

    6

    5 benefit, 1 mixed

↓ Weaker evidence

  • Points to benefit
  • Mixed
  • No difference
  • No direction
  • Points to harm

How it fits with the other research

The short answer to “Does NMN slow aging?”

Not shown in people so far.

Confidence: very low. Based on 29 on-topic papers.

Read the full answer

Of the other 6 papers on the same step: 3 benefit, 1 mixed, 2 no difference. This one found benefit.

  • Marked as a key paper in the research timeline: Early human trial: NR safe and raised NAD+.

Other papers on the same step

See all 29 studies on this question

How this page was made

Label

First read of the abstract
Claude Sonnet
Independent second read
Claude Haiku
Differences settled
The reviewer corrected 1 field after reading the abstract. Claude Opus 5.5.
Headline
Claude Sonnet, from the checked study record. A script checked its numbers and wording.
Numbers
Checked against the abstract by a script
“How much this study counts”
Fixed rules, the same for every study
Source check by a person
Not yet. Required before search engines may list this page.

Spot an error? Email a flag with a link to your source, or use the form on the question page.