The DOI matches its Crossref record; 65 of the 65 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 59 of the 84 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer's disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Cellular senescence contributes to Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathogenesis. An open-label, proof-of-concept, phase I clinical trial of orally delivered senolytic therapy, dasatinib (D) and quercetin (Q), was conducted in early-stage symptomatic patients with AD to assess central nervous system (CNS) penetrance, safety, feasibility and efficacy. Five participants (mean age = 76 + 5 years; 40% female) completed the 12-week pilot study. D and Q levels in blood increased in all participants (12.7-73.5 ng ml-1 for D and 3.29-26.3 ng ml-1 for Q). In cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), D levels were detected in four participants (80%) ranging from 0.281 to 0.536 ml-1 with a CSF to plasma ratio of 0.422-0.919%; Q was not detected. The treatment was well-tolerated, with no early discontinuation. Secondary cognitive and neuroimaging endpoints did not significantly differ from baseline to post-treatment further supporting a favorable safety profile. CSF levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) increased (t(4) = 3.913, P = 0.008 and t(4) = 3.354, P = 0.028, respectively) with trending decreases in senescence-related cytokines and chemokines, and a trend toward higher Aβ42 levels (t(4) = -2.338, P = 0.079). In summary, CNS penetrance of D was observed with outcomes supporting safety, tolerability and feasibility in patients with AD. Biomarker data provided mechanistic insights of senolytic effects that need to be confirmed in fully powered, placebo-controlled studies. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04063124 .
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
55 Own result · 17 Partly supported · 17 Own method · 13 Own interpretation · 11 Supported · 10 No full text of the sources · 3 Sources not found · 2 Supported so far · 2 Couldn’t confirm · 1 Not checked yet · 1 No basis given · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Cellular senescence is a complex stress response triggered by various stimuli, including those relevant to AD such as DNA damage, proteotoxic stress and mitochondrial dysfunction, among others9.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Abstract
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [9] Kirkland, J. L. & Tchkonia, T. Cellular senescence: a translational perspective. EBioMedicine 21, 21–28 (2017). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract says senescence can occur in response to mutations, metabolic insults, and damage or danger signals; section 3 also describes it as induced by a range of stimuli. The paper does not identify proteotoxic stress or DNA damage as triggers in its discussion, and section 4 discusses mitochondrial dysfunction as associated with senescence rather than establishing it as a trigger. Nor does it connect this proposed list of triggers specifically to Alzheimer’s disease. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“At present, dasatinib (D), a tyrosine-kinase inhibitor that is Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL)22, and quercetin (Q), a natural plant-derived flavonoid with anti-inflammatory, antioxidant and antineoplastic properties23 potentially by modulating autophagy24, are the best-characterized senolytics9.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Abstract
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [9] Kirkland, J. L. & Tchkonia, T. Cellular senescence: a translational perspective. EBioMedicine 21, 21–28 (2017). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Table 1 identifies dasatinib and quercetin as senolytics, and Section 5 describes preclinical evidence for their combined use. The review does not say they are the best-characterized senolytics relative to the other agents it discusses, so the comparative part of the claim is unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.79)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [22] Lindauer, M. & Hochhaus, A. Dasatinib. Recent Results Cancer Res. 184, 83–102 (2010). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [23] Boots, A. W., Haenen, G. R. M. M. & Bast, A. Health effects of quercetin: from antioxidant to nutraceutical. Eur. J. Pharmacol. 585, 325–337 (2008). source
- Could not verifycites [24] Vafadar, A. et al. Quercetin and cancer: new insights into its therapeutic effects on ovarian cancer cells. Cell Biosci. 10, 32 (2020). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The ‘Other cancers’ section discusses quercetin’s effects on cancer cells, and ‘Quercetin as novel therapy for ovarian cancer’ discusses its effects on apoptosis and autophagy; neither identifies quercetin or dasatinib as a senolytic. Searches for ‘senolytics,’ ‘dasatinib,’ and ‘senescence’ found no passage supporting the claim that they are the best-characterized senolytics. In the printed sentence, that proposition is attached to citation 9, not the citation to this paper. (LLM, conf=0.76)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Cellular senescence contributes to Alzheimer’s disease (AD) pathogenesis.”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
“Preclinical research has uncovered cellular senescence, a hallmark of aging, as a mechanism driving age-associated pathologies, including tau accumulation6–8.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Abstract
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [6] Musi, N. et al. Tau protein aggregation is associated with cellular senescence in the brain. Aging Cell 17, e12840 (2018). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction reports senescence-like changes in postmortem AD brain tissue and says senolytic treatment reduced NFT burden, brain atrophy, and neuron loss in a tau-transgenic mouse model. The Discussion describes a strong association between NFT pathology and a senescence-like phenotype, but the paper does not establish that cellular senescence causally contributes to AD pathogenesis in humans; the citing sentence states that contribution without qualification. (LLM, conf=0.82)
- Partly supportedcites [7] Dehkordi, S. K. et al. Profiling senescent cells in human brains reveals neurons with CDKN2D/p19 and tau neuropathology. Nat. Aging 1, 1107–1116 (2021). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract (page not provided) reports senescence-phenotype neurons overlapping with tau-containing tangles in human AD brains and says rodent-model data indicate that senescent brain cells contribute to neurodegeneration and cognitive dysfunction. The human findings show an association, not that cellular senescence contributes causally to AD pathogenesis as the citing sentence states. (LLM, conf=0.85)
- Partly supportedcites [8] Bussian, T. J. et al. Clearance of senescent glial cells prevents tau-dependent pathology and cognitive decline. Nature 562, 578–582 (2018). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The main text (page not provided) reports that clearing senescent glial cells prevented tau pathology, neurodegeneration, and cognitive decline in a PS19 mouse model. This supports a role for senescence in tau-mediated disease, but the study does not establish that it contributes to Alzheimer’s disease pathogenesis generally. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“In the context of aging and neurodegenerative disease, senescent cell accumulation has been identified in multiple cell types within the central nervous system (CNS), including neurons6,7,14,15, astrocytes16,17, microglia8,18, oligodendrocyte precursor cells19 and endothelial cells20.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Abstract
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [6] Musi, N. et al. Tau protein aggregation is associated with cellular senescence in the brain. Aging Cell 17, e12840 (2018). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The citation is attached to the neurons portion of the cell-type list, not to the other CNS cell types. The Abstract reports a senescence-consistent profile in NFT-containing neurons from human Alzheimer’s disease brain and a senescence-like phenotype associated with tangles in mouse models. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Supportedcites [7] Dehkordi, S. K. et al. Profiling senescent cells in human brains reveals neurons with CDKN2D/p19 and tau neuropathology. Nat. Aging 1, 1107–1116 (2021). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
This citation is attached to the mention of neurons, not to the separately cited cell types. The paper’s findings (section labeled Abstract; page unavailable) identify senescent excitatory neurons in adult human brains and describe a senescence phenotype in neurons with tau pathology in Alzheimer’s disease. (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Supportedcites [14] Jurk, D. et al. Postmitotic neurons develop a p21-dependent senescence-like phenotype driven by a DNA damage response. Aging Cell 11, 996–1004 (2012). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
This citation is attached to neurons, not to the sentence’s list of other CNS cell types. The Results report that Purkinje and cortical neurons in aging mouse brains increasingly showed markers of a senescence-like phenotype; they also report such markers in hippocampal neurons from old mice. (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Supportedcites [15] Riessland, M. et al. Loss of SATB1 induces p21-dependent cellular senescence in post-mitotic dopaminergic neurons. Cell Stem Cell 25, 514–530 (2019). source
This citation supports the sentence’s neuron example; the other CNS cell types have separate citations. The Discussion reports increased p21, a senescence-associated marker, in dopaminergic neurons of Parkinson’s disease patients compared with age-matched controls, and the Introduction describes evidence that neurons can enter a senescence-like state. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Supportedcites [16] Bhat, R. et al. Astrocyte senescence as a component of Alzheimer’s disease. PLoS ONE 7, e45069 (2012). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The citation is offered for the astrocyte portion of the list, not every CNS cell type named. The Introduction and Discussion report accumulation of senescent astrocytes in aged human brain and in brain tissue from patients with Alzheimer’s disease. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Supportedcites [17] Chinta, S. J. et al. Cellular senescence is induced by the environmental neurotoxin paraquat and contributes to neuropathology linked to Parkinson’s disease. Cell Rep. 22, 930–940 (2018). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
This paper supports the astrocyte portion of the citing sentence, rather than the claims about every listed CNS cell type. The Results section reports senescence markers in astrocytes in Parkinsonian brain tissue and describes increases in astrocytes expressing such markers during normal aging. (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Supportedcites [8] Bussian, T. J. et al. Clearance of senescent glial cells prevents tau-dependent pathology and cognitive decline. Nature 562, 578–582 (2018). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The study’s cell-type analysis reports senescence-associated findings in microglia and astrocytes in a mouse model of tau-dependent neurodegeneration. That supports the microglia example to which this citation is attached; the paper is not being cited here for every CNS cell type in the sentence. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [18] Streit, W. J. & Xue, Q.-S. Human CNS immune senescence and neurodegeneration. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 29, 93–96 (2014). source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Based on CSF assays conducted using Lumipulse assays at baseline, all participants displayed biological markers associated with AD33 with CSF Aβ42 levels ranging from 295 to 647 pg ml−1, total tau ranging from 385 to 917 pg ml−1 and phosphorylated tau (pTau) 181 ranging from 62 to 147 pg ml−1, meeting CSF criteria for a biological diagnosis of AD.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Results > Trial design and characteristics of study participants
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [33] Alcolea, D. et al. Agreement of amyloid PET and CSF biomarkers for Alzheimer’s disease on Lumipulse. Ann. Clin. Transl. Neurol. 6, 1815–1824 (2019). source
The Introduction identifies CSF Aβ1-42, pTau, and tTau as biomarkers used in the biological classification of AD. The Results section reports Lumipulse cutoffs for those markers. The citation follows the statement that the markers are associated with AD; the numerical ranges describe the citing authors’ participants, not this source paper’s cohort. (LLM, conf=0.87)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Given the compelling evidence provided by preclinical research6,19, coupled with the encouraging safety profiles reported in human studies of D + Q for other disease indications27,28, we conducted the first clinical trial of senolytic therapy for AD.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Abstract
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [6] Musi, N. et al. Tau protein aggregation is associated with cellular senescence in the brain. Aging Cell 17, e12840 (2018). source
The citation supports the sentence’s reference to preclinical research, not the citing authors’ statement that they conducted the first clinical trial. In the Results section, the source reports a dasatinib-and-quercetin experiment in tau transgenic mice; the Methods section also identifies the treated subjects as mice. The source is therefore an example of the preclinical evidence for which it is cited. (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Supportedcites [19] Zhang, P. et al. Senolytic therapy alleviates Aβ-associated oligodendrocyte progenitor cell senescence and cognitive deficits in an Alzheimer’s disease model. Nat. Neurosci. 22, 719–728 (2019). source
The citation supports the sentence’s reference to preclinical evidence, not the citing authors’ statement that they conducted the first clinical trial. The cited paper’s Results report that senolytic treatment improved memory-test performance in AD-model mice; its Discussion describes clinical studies as future work. (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Supportedcites [27] Justice, J. N. et al. Senolytics in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: results from a first-in-human, open-label, pilot study. EBioMedicine 40, 554–563 (2019). source
The citation supports the sentence’s reference to human D+Q safety data for another disease indication, not the citing authors’ statement that they conducted an Alzheimer’s trial. In the Discussion, the IPF pilot reports that D+Q was generally well tolerated, while noting a hospitalization and that its single-arm design cannot definitively establish safety. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Supportedcites [28] Hickson, L. J. et al. Senolytics decrease senescent cells in humans: preliminary report from a clinical trial of Dasatinib plus Quercetin in individuals with diabetic kidney disease. EBioMedicine 47, 446–456 (2019). source
The citation supports the statement about D + Q safety in human studies for other indications, not the citing authors’ statement that they conducted an Alzheimer’s disease trial. In the Results (page unavailable), this diabetic kidney disease study reports no serious adverse events or treatment discontinuations among nine participants. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The doses and intermittent scheduling regimen were selected based on prior research demonstrating safety and early evidence of efficacy for other disease indications9,27.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [9] Kirkland, J. L. & Tchkonia, T. Cellular senescence: a translational perspective. EBioMedicine 21, 21–28 (2017). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 6 (page unavailable) reports that intermittent dasatinib plus quercetin alleviated several conditions in mice and suggests intermittent treatment could reduce side-effect risk. The Conclusions (page unavailable) likewise describe human use as a future possibility, not established safety. Neither passage supports the claim that the cited paper established the selected doses or demonstrated safety and early efficacy for other disease indications. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Supportedcites [27] Justice, J. N. et al. Senolytics in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: results from a first-in-human, open-label, pilot study. EBioMedicine 40, 554–563 (2019). source
The Methods (Dosing; page unavailable) say the dasatinib dose was based on an FDA-approved dose and that the intermittent regimen drew on prior animal, tissue, and pharmacokinetic studies. The Discussion (Drug and dosing considerations; page unavailable) adds that the drugs’ safety profiles were understood from use for other human indications and that DQ had shown efficacy in mouse models of several age-related disorders. (LLM, conf=0.86)
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“More consistent CSF concentrations may have been observed in our study of individuals with AD due to the disease’s impact on blood–brain barrier integrity38.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [38] Erickson, M. A. & Banks, W. A. Blood–brain barrier dysfunction as a cause and consequence of Alzheimer’s disease. J. Cereb. Blood Flow Metab. 33, 1500–1513 (2013). source
The paper’s “Summary of Results for Blood-Brain Barrier Disruption” says some studies find BBB disruption in AD patients or a subset of them, while others do not. That qualified evidence supports the citing authors’ suggestion that AD-related changes in BBB integrity may explain their own CSF observation; the paper does not establish that explanation as fact. (LLM, conf=0.82)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Following oral ingestion of D in mice, a prior study reported D in brain homogenates using HPLC/MS at concentrations that were 12- to 31-fold lower than in plasma36.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [36] Porkka, K. et al. Dasatinib crosses the blood-brain barrier and is an efficient therapy for central nervous system Philadelphia chromosome-positive leukemia. Blood 112, 1005–1012 (2008). source
The Experiment 3 section reports that dasatinib brain concentrations in mice were 12- to 31-fold lower than plasma concentrations. The methods state that dasatinib was administered orally, brain samples were homogenized, and plasma and brain concentrations were measured by HPLC/MS. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“However, studies in preclinical models of various CNS disorders have demonstrated reduced gliosis and neuroinflammation with senescent cell clearance, for example,6,8,17,19,25,50.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [6] Musi, N. et al. Tau protein aggregation is associated with cellular senescence in the brain. Aging Cell 17, e12840 (2018). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results section reports that senolytic treatment reduced senescence-associated inflammatory gene expression in a tau-transgenic mouse model. It does not show reduced gliosis: astrocyte GFAP was unchanged and microglial Iba1 increased. This study also examines one tau-associated model, not various CNS disorders. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Partly supportedcites [8] Bussian, T. J. et al. Clearance of senescent glial cells prevents tau-dependent pathology and cognitive decline. Nature 562, 578–582 (2018). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (page unavailable) report that clearing senescent glial cells prevented gliosis in a PS19 mouse model of tauopathy. The paper does not report a reduction in neuroinflammation as a separate outcome, so that part of the claim is not established by this source. (LLM, conf=0.85)
- Partly supportedcites [17] Chinta, S. J. et al. Cellular senescence is induced by the environmental neurotoxin paraquat and contributes to neuropathology linked to Parkinson’s disease. Cell Rep. 22, 930–940 (2018). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In Results, under “Depleting Senescent Cells Abrogates PQ-Induced Neuropathology” (page unavailable), senescent-cell elimination in a paraquat-treated mouse model abrogated senescent phenotypes, including the measured increase in IL-6, a pro-inflammatory cytokine. The paper therefore supports a reduction in an inflammatory marker with clearance, but the cited passages do not report reduced gliosis or establish a broader reduction in neuroinflammation. (LLM, conf=0.86)
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
- It may state two separate claims as one. 59
- Probably not a substantial claim. 21
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The senescence stress response allows damaged cells to survive by upregulating senescent cell anti-apoptotic pathways (SCAPs)10 and causes inflammation through their senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP)11,12.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Abstract
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [10] Zhu, Y. I. et al. The Achilles’ heel of senescent cells: from transcriptome to senolytic drugs. Aging Cell 14, 644–658 (2015). source
Citation 10 is attached to the claim about senescent cell anti-apoptotic pathways, not the SASP inflammation claim cited to references 11 and 12. In Results (‘The senescent transcriptome and anti-apoptotic pathways’), the paper reports upregulation of anti-apoptotic gene sets in senescent cells; the Discussion says these pathways help ensure survival following stress and damage. (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Supportedcites [11] Kritsilis, M. et al. Ageing, cellular senescence and neurodegenerative disease. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 19, 2937 (2018). source
Section 2 describes senescence as a response to cellular damage and says senescent cells remain viable. Section 3 describes resistance to apoptosis, including increased expression of anti-apoptotic proteins, while sections 3 and 5 describe SASP factors as pro-inflammatory. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Could not verifycites [12] Sharma, V., Gilhotra, R., Dhingra, D. & Gilhotra, N. Possible underlying influence of p38MAPK and NF-κB in the diminished anti-anxiety effect of diazepam in stressed mice. J. Pharmacol. Sci. 116, 257–263 (2011). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction and Discussion address immobilization stress, anxiety, p38MAPK, NF-κB, and nitric oxide signaling in mice, not cellular senescence. Searches for senescent-cell anti-apoptotic pathways and the senescence-associated secretory phenotype found no passage supporting either mechanism; the citation placed after SCAPs is therefore not substantiated by our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The SASP comprises cytokines, chemokines, growth factors and extracellular matrix remodeling molecules, which can spread in a paracrine manner and propagate the senescent phenotype to neighboring cells9,13.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Abstract
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [9] Kirkland, J. L. & Tchkonia, T. Cellular senescence: a translational perspective. EBioMedicine 21, 21–28 (2017). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract (page unavailable) describes the SASP as secreted cytokines, chemokines, and extracellular matrix-damaging molecules, supporting the sentence’s description of SASP factors. Neither it nor the retrieved Section 3 passages says those factors spread senescence to neighboring cells in a paracrine manner. (LLM, conf=0.83)
- Supportedcites [13] Acosta, J. C. et al. A complex secretory program orchestrated by the inflammasome controls paracrine senescence. Nat. Cell Biol. 15, 978–990 (2013). source
The section “Paracrine senescence is a stable arrest mediated by secreted factors” (page not provided) reports that conditioned medium from senescent cells induced senescence in normal cells, and that nearby cells showed reduced proliferation. “Multiple components of the SASP mediate paracrine senescence” identifies secreted SASP factors involved in that effect. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Other research teams confirmed the association between tau and senescence in PS19 tau transgenic mice8 and the effective clearance of senescent cells using D + Q in the Tg(APP/PS1) Aβ-producing mouse model19.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Abstract
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [8] Bussian, T. J. et al. Clearance of senescent glial cells prevents tau-dependent pathology and cognitive decline. Nature 562, 578–582 (2018). source
The citation to this paper is attached to the PS19 tau–senescence association, not the separate D + Q claim, which has its own citation. The main text reports increased senescence-marker expression in PS19 mice at sites of tau pathology; Extended Data Figure 1 also documents senescent-cell accumulation. Page numbers are not provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Supportedcites [19] Zhang, P. et al. Senolytic therapy alleviates Aβ-associated oligodendrocyte progenitor cell senescence and cognitive deficits in an Alzheimer’s disease model. Nat. Neurosci. 22, 719–728 (2019). source
The citation to this paper is attached to the D + Q finding in APP/PS1 mice, not the preceding PS19 tau finding. The Results report that D + Q reduced markers of Aβ-plaque-associated senescent cells in APP/PS1 mouse brains, and the Discussion states that it removed senescent cells from the plaque environment. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“When combined, D + Q has been shown to selectively clear senescent cells in culture (100 nM D + 10 μM Q), in animal models (5 mg kg−1 D + 50 mg kg−1 Q) and humans (100 mg D + 1,000 mg Q) (refs. 9,10,21,25).”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Abstract
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [9] Kirkland, J. L. & Tchkonia, T. Cellular senescence: a translational perspective. EBioMedicine 21, 21–28 (2017). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 5 reports that D + Q cleared senescent cells in preclinical mouse studies and retained senolytic effects in vitro. The cited copy does not give the stated culture or animal doses. Section 7 says clinical trials would need to establish whether senolytics reduce senescent-cell numbers in humans; it does not report human clearance at 100 mg D + 1,000 mg Q. Page numbers are unavailable in the indexed copy. (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Partly supportedcites [10] Zhu, Y. I. et al. The Achilles’ heel of senescent cells: from transcriptome to senolytic drugs. Aging Cell 14, 644–658 (2015). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results sections on in-vitro candidates and in-vivo treatment report selective effects in cultured cells at 100 nM dasatinib plus 10 μM quercetin, and reduced senescence markers in mice given 5 mg/kg plus 50 mg/kg. The Discussion (page unavailable) calls the work a first step toward clinical treatment and says further issues must be examined before senolytics are considered for use in humans. This paper does not establish senescent-cell clearance in humans at 100 mg plus 1,000 mg. (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [21] Tchkonia, T. & Kirkland, J. L. Aging, cell senescence, and chronic disease: emerging therapeutic strategies. JAMA 320, 1319–1320 (2018). source
- Partly supportedcites [25] Ogrodnik, M. et al. Cellular senescence drives age-dependent hepatic steatosis. Nat. Commun. 8, 15691 (2017). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results section says D+Q selectively ablates senescent cells in vitro and in vivo, and the Methods (Animals; page unavailable) specify 5 mg/kg dasatinib plus 50 mg/kg quercetin for db/db mice. The copy does not substantiate the stated culture concentrations or show senescent-cell clearance in humans at 100 mg plus 1,000 mg; its human observations concern senescence markers in NAFLD patients, not D+Q treatment. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Using the rTg(tauP301L)4510 transgenic mouse model of tau pathogenesis, we found that biweekly administration of D + Q relative to placebo resulted in a 35% reduction in cortical NFT accumulation, which correlated with reduced cortical brain atrophy and restored aberrant cerebral blood flow6.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Abstract
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [6] Musi, N. et al. Tau protein aggregation is associated with cellular senescence in the brain. Aging Cell 17, e12840 (2018). source
The Results section reports that biweekly dasatinib plus quercetin reduced NFT-containing cortical neurons by 35% in tauNFT–Mapt0/0 mice. It also reports reduced cortical atrophy and improved aberrant cerebral blood flow, which was no longer statistically different from controls. The Methods identify the P301L tau-expressing rTg4510 line used in the study. (LLM, conf=0.91)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Transcriptomic data from postmortem human AD brain tissue and AD mouse models revealed senescent cell signatures predicted to be responsive to D + Q therapy (that is, SCAPs), which were specifically associated with neurofibrillary tangle (NFT)-bearing neurons6,7.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Abstract
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [6] Musi, N. et al. Tau protein aggregation is associated with cellular senescence in the brain. Aging Cell 17, e12840 (2018). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results sections on postmortem AD neurons and tau transgenic mice report senescence-like transcriptomic profiles associated with NFTs. The senolytic-treatment Results section reports that dasatinib plus quercetin reduced NFT-containing neurons and an associated senescence gene array in mice. The paper does not say that the transcriptomic signatures themselves predicted responsiveness to that therapy in both human tissue and mouse models. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Partly supportedcites [7] Dehkordi, S. K. et al. Profiling senescent cells in human brains reveals neurons with CDKN2D/p19 and tau neuropathology. Nat. Aging 1, 1107–1116 (2021). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract (page unavailable) reports senescence signatures in transcriptomic data from postmortem human brains and their overlap with neurofibrillary tangle-bearing excitatory neurons. The Methods, “Eigengene analysis” (page unavailable), describes analysis of human RNA-sequencing data; the gene sets included findings from mouse models, but this paper does not report analyzing transcriptomic data from AD mouse models or predicting responsiveness to dasatinib plus quercetin. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“As previously described29, the open-label, proof-of-concept, Phase I, single-site pilot study protocol included the completion of 11 study visits over a period of 20–24 weeks (Fig. 1).”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Results > Trial design and characteristics of study participants
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [29] Gonzales, M. M. et al. Senolytic therapy to modulate the progression of Alzheimer’s disease (SToMP-AD): a pilot clinical trial. J. Prev. Alzheimers Dis. 9, 22–29 (2022). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Methods > Study Design (page unavailable) describes this as an open-label pilot and an initial proof-of-concept for a larger phase II trial; it also says all visits will occur at one site. It does not identify SToMP-AD as a phase I trial. The Discussion’s references to phase I trials concern other studies. (LLM, conf=0.85)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Senescent cells accumulate slowly, and preclinical studies demonstrate that continuous treatment is not necessary. Instead, periodic clearance of senescent cells is sufficient to exert health benefits (reviewed26).”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Abstract
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [26] Kirkland, J. L. & Tchkonia, T. Senolytic drugs: from discovery to translation. J. Intern. Med. 288, 518–536 (2020). source
The Cellular senescence figure caption says a cell can take up to six weeks to become fully senescent and that cells can therefore be removed intermittently rather than through continuous treatment. The experimental-animal section reports that intermittent D + Q was as effective as continuous treatment and produced benefits for bone health in old mice. (LLM, conf=0.92)
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Senolytic treatment follows an intermittent dosing strategy that reflects its mechanism of action, inducing senescent cell death10.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Abstract
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [10] Zhu, Y. I. et al. The Achilles’ heel of senescent cells: from transcriptome to senolytic drugs. Aging Cell 14, 644–658 (2015). source
The Introduction says the drugs induce apoptosis preferentially in senescent cells. The Discussion links a single treatment’s lasting effects to a reduced senescent-cell burden rather than a need for continued dosing, and proposes intermittent short treatments. The paper presents this as a rationale and experimental approach, not an established clinical schedule. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In our study, we selected the combination of D and Q as they are among the best-characterized senolytic agents, target multiple SCAP pathways and are repurposed9,21, expediting clinical testing.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [9] Kirkland, J. L. & Tchkonia, T. Cellular senescence: a translational perspective. EBioMedicine 21, 21–28 (2017). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Table 1 (Search Strategy and Selection Criteria; page unavailable) lists multiple SCAP pathways targeted by D + Q, and section 5 reports that the drugs were combined because they target different senescent cell types. The review discusses substantial preclinical work on D + Q, consistent with their being well characterized, but the retrieved passages do not say that repurposing these agents expedites clinical testing. (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [21] Tchkonia, T. & Kirkland, J. L. Aging, cell senescence, and chronic disease: emerging therapeutic strategies. JAMA 320, 1319–1320 (2018). source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The intermittent dosing regimen was implemented because senescent cells across organ systems, including the brain, typically accumulate over a period of weeks, suggesting that drugs do not continually need to be present to be effective6,10.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [6] Musi, N. et al. Tau protein aggregation is associated with cellular senescence in the brain. Aging Cell 17, e12840 (2018). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Methods (DQ administration; page unavailable) describe intermittent dosing in mice, and the Results (Senolytic treatment reduced NFT burden and neurodegeneration; page unavailable) report that it reduced NFT-containing cortical neurons. The paper does not say senescent cells typically accumulate over weeks across organs, or give that as the reason for intermittent dosing. Its finding supports effectiveness without continuous dosing in this mouse brain model, not a general rule across organ systems. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Partly supportedcites [10] Zhu, Y. I. et al. The Achilles’ heel of senescent cells: from transcriptome to senolytic drugs. Aging Cell 14, 644–658 (2015). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion reports that a single senolytic treatment had effects lasting many weeks after the drugs were gone, supporting the suggestion that continuous drug presence is unnecessary. It does not say that senescent cells across organs, including the brain, typically accumulate over weeks or give that as the reason for intermittent dosing. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Furthermore, prior research conducted on postmortem brain tissue from individuals with AD has identified senescent astrocytes16, and mouse models have demonstrated that they are cleared with senolytic treatment8,17.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [16] Bhat, R. et al. Astrocyte senescence as a component of Alzheimer’s disease. PLoS ONE 7, e45069 (2012). source
The Discussion (page not provided) reports senescent astrocytes in postmortem brain tissue from patients with AD. The mouse-model and senolytic-treatment claim carries separate citations (8, 17), so it is not attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Partly supportedcites [8] Bussian, T. J. et al. Clearance of senescent glial cells prevents tau-dependent pathology and cognitive decline. Nature 562, 578–582 (2018). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The citation to this paper is attached to the mouse-model claim, not the preceding claim about postmortem AD tissue. In the main text (Fig. 1; page unavailable), the authors identify senescent astrocytes in PS19 mice and report their clearance with AP in a genetic model. Their senolytic ABT263 experiment (Fig. 4; page unavailable) shows reduced senescence-associated gene expression, but does not directly show that senescent astrocytes were cleared by the drug. (LLM, conf=0.82)
- Supportedcites [17] Chinta, S. J. et al. Cellular senescence is induced by the environmental neurotoxin paraquat and contributes to neuropathology linked to Parkinson’s disease. Cell Rep. 22, 930–940 (2018). source
The Results section, “Depleting Senescent Cells Abrogates PQ-Induced Neuropathology” (page unavailable), reports that systemic ganciclovir eliminated senescent cells and abrogated senescent astrocyte phenotypes in paraquat-treated p16-3MR mice. This supports the mouse-treatment portion attributed to this source; the postmortem AD-tissue finding is attached to a different citation. The mice in this study modeled paraquat-induced Parkinsonian pathology, not AD. (LLM, conf=0.88)
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“A prior retrospective study conducted in adults with CML and normal baseline glucose and lipid levels suggested that D may cause mild increases in glucose, triglycerides and low-density lipoprotein–cholesterol levels46.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [46] Yu, L., Liu, J., Huang, X. & Jiang, Q. Adverse effects of dasatinib on glucose–lipid metabolism in patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia in the chronic phase. Sci. Rep. 9, 17601 (2019). source
The Discussion describes this as a retrospective study of CML patients with normal baseline glucose-lipid levels. The Results sections on hyperglycaemia, hypertriglyceridemia and hyper-LDL-cholesterolemia report increases during therapy in the dasatinib cohort; the Results also describe the metabolic abnormalities as mild or intermediate. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.92)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“D has been associated with changes in glucose regulation with reports of both hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia emerging45,46.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [45] Lundholm, M. D. & Charnogursky, G. A. Dasatinib-induced hypoglycemia in a patient with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Clin. Case Rep. 8, 1238–1240 (2020). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion and Case Presentation link dasatinib treatment to hypoglycemia. The Case Presentation also reports hyperglycemia, but it occurred after dasatinib was discontinued and the patient started imatinib; it does not support a report of dasatinib-associated hyperglycemia. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Partly supportedcites [46] Yu, L., Liu, J., Huang, X. & Jiang, Q. Adverse effects of dasatinib on glucose–lipid metabolism in patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia in the chronic phase. Sci. Rep. 9, 17601 (2019). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results and Discussion report that dasatinib was associated with a higher onset of hyperglycaemia. The Discussion also reports studies in which dasatinib lowered blood glucose or ameliorated hyperglycaemia, but it does not report hypoglycaemia; lowering elevated glucose is not the same as causing low blood glucose. (LLM, conf=0.87)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“In plasma, D has been shown to reach peak concentrations within 2 h of administration36”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [36] Porkka, K. et al. Dasatinib crosses the blood-brain barrier and is an efficient therapy for central nervous system Philadelphia chromosome-positive leukemia. Blood 112, 1005–1012 (2008). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The ‘Dasatinib concentrations in CSF’ section describes patient samples collected about three hours after dosing, but does not establish when plasma concentrations peaked. The plasma pharmacokinetic measurements described elsewhere are from mice. A search for human peak plasma concentration or time to peak found no supporting passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.72)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Could not verify
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Prior studies have reported that biomarkers of cellular senescence vary across cell types and inducers53,54.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [53] Tuttle, C. S. L. et al. Cellular senescence and chronological age in various human tissues: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Aging Cell 19, e13083 (2020). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (page unavailable) reports that the magnitude of senescence differed by tissue or cell type and by the marker used. The Introduction (page unavailable) suggests that different triggers of senescence may explain variation in cells expressing markers, but it does not establish that biomarkers vary across inducers. (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Partly supportedcites [54] Wiley, C. D. et al. Analysis of individual cells identifies cell-to-cell variability following induction of cellular senescence. Aging Cell 16, 1043–1050 (2017). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (page not provided) says that non-genotoxic senescence inducers can produce distinct SASP and gene-expression profiles, supporting variation by inducer. The paper studies variability among individual human fibroblasts, not differences in biomarkers across cell types; that part of the claim is not supported by our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“CSF GFAP is presumed to reflect reactive astrogliosis48 and demonstrates elevations early in the neurodegenerative disease process49.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [48] Lamers, K. J. B. et al. Protein S-100B, neuron-specific enolase (NSE), myelin basic protein (MBP) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and blood of neurological patients. Brain Res. Bull. 61, 261–264 (2003). source
- Partly supportedcites [49] Benedet, A. L. et al. Differences between plasma and cerebrospinal fluid glial fibrillary acidic protein levels across the Alzheimer disease continuum. JAMA Neurol. 78, 1471–1483 (2021). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (Plasma GFAP Levels Throughout the AD Continuum) show elevated CSF GFAP in the preclinical AD A+T+ group, supporting an elevation before symptomatic disease. But CSF GFAP was not significantly elevated in the earlier A+T– or low-Aβ groups. The cited finding is specific to AD, not neurodegenerative disease generally; the separate claim about reactive astrogliosis is attached to citation 48. (LLM, conf=0.86)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In preclinical studies, D prevented intracranial tumor growth, stabilized and regressed CNS disease indicating its action in the CNS36, suggesting a CNS treatment effect.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [36] Porkka, K. et al. Dasatinib crosses the blood-brain barrier and is an efficient therapy for central nervous system Philadelphia chromosome-positive leukemia. Blood 112, 1005–1012 (2008). source
Experiment 2 reports regression of CNS tumors followed by stasis while mice remained on dasatinib. Experiment 3 reports that intracranial tumors regressed to near-undetectable levels and remained so during treatment; measured brain drug concentrations support CNS action. The effects were observed during treatment, not after it stopped. (LLM, conf=0.92)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A total of 21 participants were screened over the phone, eight of whom did not meet the eligibility criteria (Fig. 2). Thirteen participants completed the in-person screening visit, and of those, seven were screen failures and one withdrew prior to enrollment.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Results > Trial design and characteristics of study participants
plainn = 21- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In CSF, thymus- and activation-regulated chemokine (TARC), IL-17A, I-TAC, eotaxin-2, eotaxin and MIP-1α levels decreased and IL-6 levels increased from baseline to post-treatment (Extended Data Table 3).”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Results > Markers of cellular senescence and SASP
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The treatment was well-tolerated, with no early discontinuation.”
- Also stated in: § Discussion · plain
“In addition, the intervention was well-tolerated with no premature discontinuation and only three AEs occurring following treatment initiation.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Discussion · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There was a statistically, but not clinically, significant increase in total cholesterol from baseline to post-treatment (baseline: 169.2 ± 35.5 mg dl−1; post-treatment: 179.4 ± 40.0 mg dl−1, t(4) = 2.904, P = 0.044, 95% CI: 0.45–19.95).”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Results > Safety and adherence
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Baseline to post-treatment changes in the prespecified secondary cognitive outcomes, MoCA and CDR sum of boxes (SOB), were not significant (Extended Data Table 1).”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Results > Secondary endpoints
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There were no significant changes in body mass index (BMI; baseline: 23.0 ± 4.3 kg m−2; post-treatment: 22.7 ± 4.2 kg m−2, t(4) = −1.12, P = 0.32, 95% CI: −0.77 to 0.33), systolic blood pressure (baseline: 114.4 ± 11.8 mmHg; post-treatment: 120.4 ± 16.7 mmHg, t(4) = 0.56, P = 0.61, 95% CI: −23.96 to 35.96) or diastolic blood pressure (baseline: 63.8 ± 14.3 mmHg; post-treatment: 67.4 ± 9.2 mmHg, t(”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Results > Safety and adherence
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Applying the unadjusted P < 0.05 cut-off, plasma levels of IL-17E, IL-21, IL-23, IL-17A/F, IL-17D, IL-10, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), IL-31, MCP-2, macrophage inflammatory protein (MIP)-1β and MIP-1α decreased from baseline to post-treatment, whereas YKL-40 levels increased.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Results > Markers of cellular senescence and SASP
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Regarding the highest level of educational attainment, two participants (40%) had high school diplomas, one (20%) had some college and two participants (40%) had college degrees or higher.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Results > Trial design and characteristics of study participants
plainn = 2- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A total of six adverse events (AEs) occurred during the course of the study, of which three (two mild: diarrhea and emesis, urinary tract infection; one moderate: hypoglycemia) occurred following the start of the intervention.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Results > Safety and adherence
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Before the start of the intervention, there was one moderate-severity AE (fall resulting in hematoma) and two mild AEs (hematuria and diarrhea).”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Results > Safety and adherence
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In plasma at baseline, three participants had no detectable Q levels and the other two had concentrations of 1.09 and 1.73 ng ml−1 (LOQ = 1.0 ng ml−1).”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Results > Primary endpoints
plainn = 3- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No statistically significant treatment changes were observed; however, there was a trend (t(4) = 2.34, P = 0.0795, 95% confidence interval (CI): −170.6 to 14.6) toward higher Aβ42 levels post-treatment (Fig. 4a–f).”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Results > ADRD biomarkers
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In CSF, post-treatment D levels were slightly above the limit of quantitation (LOQ = 0.2 ng ml−1) in four of five participants, ranging from 0.281 to 0.536 ng ml−1, and the fifth had no detectable levels.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Results > Primary endpoints
plainn = 4- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Five participants (aged 70–82 years, median 76; 40% female, based on self-report; 80% non-Hispanic White, 20% Hispanic) enrolled in the intervention between March 6, 2020, and April 19, 2021.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Results > Trial design and characteristics of study participants
plainn = 5- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Paired t-tests of baseline versus post-treatment MRIs revealed no significant differences in total brain volume, gray matter or white matter density or right or left hippocampal volume, indicative of stable brain morphology over the 3-month assessment period (Extended Data Table 2).”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Results > Secondary endpoints
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The two mild AEs were deemed unlikely related to the study, and the one moderate AE, hypoglycemia, was deemed possibly related to the intervention.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Results > Safety and adherence
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“CSF analyses indicated baseline to post-treatment decreases in adaptive immunity markers (such as TARC, IL-17A, I-TAC, eotaxin and eotaxin-2) and chemokines (such as MIP-1α). A similar pattern was observed in plasma whereby treatment was associated with a decrease in adaptive immunity markers (such as IL-23, IL-21, IL-17, IL-31 and VEGF 47) and chemokines (such as MIP-1α and MIP-1β).”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In our study, Q was consistently measured in plasma across participants. However, unlike D, Q was not detectable in CSF within our sample.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In our study, the treatment was well-tolerated with excellent adherence to the study drug regime.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Clinical safety laboratories were generally stable from baseline to post-treatment. Only one statistically significant change emerged, which was an increase in total cholesterol levels. However, cholesterol levels remained in the normative range.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The results from the Lumipulse assay, but not from the Simoa® assay, showed a trend toward increased post-treatment Aβ42 levels.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this trial, we did not observe changes in total tau, pTau-181 or pTau-231”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Regarding neuroimaging outcomes, there were no substantial changes in total brain volume, hippocampal volume or gray matter or white matter density from baseline to post-treatment.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In our study, we observed a similar range of D concentrations in CSF. However, the detectable levels were more readily observed in our population, occurring in 80% (4/5 individuals) of participants.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
plainn = 5- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The analyses revealed a statistically significant elevation of IL-6 in CSF after treatment. Plasma levels modestly increased but did not reach statistical significance.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Throughout the study, a total of six AEs occurred, of which three emerged after treatment initiation. Two of these AEs were mild and highly common in the study population. Hypoglycemia was observed in one participant.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The majority of individuals with AD present with multiple etiological contributors to dementia5, suggesting that therapeutic targets beyond Aβ and tau neuropathology may be important for maximum treatment benefits.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [5] Korczyn, A. D. Mixed dementia—the most common cause of dementia. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 977, 129–134 (2002). source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All participants provided written informed consent with appropriate legal representation for individuals lacking the capacity to consent.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Results > Trial design and characteristics of study participants
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“D + Q were administered under Investigational New Drug (IND) 143945–0006 (to N.M.).”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Results > Trial design and characteristics of study participants
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The study was conducted in adherence with the Guideline for Good Clinical Practice, and the protocol was approved by the UT Health San Antonio Institutional Review Board (IRB).”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Results > Trial design and characteristics of study participants
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Biomarker data provided mechanistic insights of senolytic effects that need to be confirmed in fully powered, placebo-controlled studies.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Rests on an assumption: Changes in cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers over the open-label period reflect senolytic treatment effects rather than natural variation or disease progression.
- Rests on an assumption: The measured senescence-associated secretory phenotype cytokines and chemokines are valid markers of senolytic target engagement in Alzheimer’s disease.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In summary, CNS penetrance of D was observed with outcomes supporting safety, tolerability and feasibility in patients with AD.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While our study was underpowered and of insufficient duration to provide a comprehensive evaluation of neuroimaging outcomes”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For example, in a preclinical study of rats that ingested 213 mg of Q per day, Q was detectable in brain homogenates (41.1 ± 11.11 pmol g−1), using HPLC–tandem mass spectrometry, plateauing after 1 week of administration42.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [42] Ishisaka, A. et al. Accumulation of orally administered quercetin in brain tissue and its antioxidative effects in rats. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 51, 1329–1336 (2011). source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is important to highlight that none of the markers would have withstood multiple comparisons correction, and the preliminary findings require further replication in studies designed to assess this endpoint.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We conclude that our vanguard study supports safety and tolerability of D and Q in older adults with AD.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“If we extrapolate these results to our study, we assayed Q at a timepoint where it should have been detected in CSF, but the level would fall tenfold below the detection limits of our assay.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [44] Wiczkowski, W. et al. Quercetin and isorhamnetin aglycones are the main metabolites of dietary quercetin in cerebrospinal fluid. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 59, 1088–1094 (2015). source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Sheep CSF pharmacokinetic data for quercetin can be extrapolated to humans in this study.
In the paper
“In a sheep model, intragastric Q was administered at a dose of 22.19 mg; continuous monitoring of CSF through an implanted brain ventricle cannula demonstrated detectable Q within 1 h of dosing. The highest levels were observed at 5.5 h, Cmax = 0.30 ± 0.1 nmol l−1 (~100-fold less than that detected in matching plasma)44.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [44] Wiczkowski, W. et al. Quercetin and isorhamnetin aglycones are the main metabolites of dietary quercetin in cerebrospinal fluid. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 59, 1088–1094 (2015). source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In animal model research, oral administration of Q has resulted in detectable brain levels40 resulting in favorable outcomes including reduced oxidative stress in the brain41,42, suggesting a therapeutic effect in the CNS.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [40] Wróbel-Biedrawa, D. et al. A flavonoid on the brain: Quercetin as a potential therapeutic agent in central nervous system disorders. Life (Basel) 12, 591 (2022).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [41] Sun, S. W. et al. Quercetin attenuates spontaneous behavior and spatial memory impairment in d-galactose-treated mice by increasing brain antioxidant capacity. Nutr. Res. 27, 169–175 (2007). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [42] Ishisaka, A. et al. Accumulation of orally administered quercetin in brain tissue and its antioxidative effects in rats. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 51, 1329–1336 (2011). source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“however, the study was not powered to assess these outcomes.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The increases observed in GFAP and IL-6 may reflect the clearance of senescent astrocytes or possibly an acute inflammatory response to treatment.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In culture, Q has been shown to permeate primary brain microvessel endothelial cells and primary astroglia cells43, suggesting blood–brain barrier penetrance.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [43] Ren, S. C. et al. Quercetin permeability across blood–brain barrier and its effect on the viability of U251 cells. Sichuan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban 41, 751–754 (2010).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Given that Q is rapidly metabolized in the human intestinal mucosa and liver and it has low bioavailability40”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [40] Wróbel-Biedrawa, D. et al. A flavonoid on the brain: Quercetin as a potential therapeutic agent in central nervous system disorders. Life (Basel) 12, 591 (2022).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The null findings are not surprising as our trial was not designed to evaluate the efficacy and included small sample size and short duration of treatment.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“if our findings are replicated in well-powered studies designed to assess efficacy, they would potentially suggest beneficial disease modification with senolytic treatment.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [51] Andreasen, N. et al. Cerebrospinal fluid β-amyloid(1-42) in Alzheimer disease: differences between early- and late-onset Alzheimer disease and stability during the course of disease. Arch. Neurol. 56, 673–680 (1999). source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, our study was designed to evaluate the CNS penetrance of D and Q. Therefore, it was not powered to assess outcomes related to target engagement, cognition or disease modification.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The short trial duration and lack of a placebo group place further restrictions on interpreting these outcomes.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The treatment-induced changes in IL-6 may reflect senescent cell apoptosis whereby IL-6 was directly released from senescent cells upon their lysis; alternatively, apoptosis may have initiated an immune response to clear the cellular debris.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Change in IL-6 was a prespecified secondary outcome.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our study design of in-clinic administrations on the first day of each drug cycle enabled us to carefully monitor participant safety and was likely supportive of our 100% study drug adherence rate.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The low CSF to plasma ratio of D and absence of Q in CSF may support Phase Ib studies aimed at increasing Q bioavailability (for example, reviewed40) and D levels in the CNS”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [40] Wróbel-Biedrawa, D. et al. A flavonoid on the brain: Quercetin as a potential therapeutic agent in central nervous system disorders. Life (Basel) 12, 591 (2022).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our study was not powered to examine target engagement, but instead designed to collect exploratory data on baseline to post-treatment changes in markers of cellular senescence and SASP both in CSF and blood.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The prespecified cognitive outcomes of interest were baseline to post-treatment changes on the MoCA31 and CDR SOB30.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Methods > Cognitive and functional outcomes
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [31] Nasreddine, Z. S. et al. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 53, 695–699 (2005). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [30] Morris, J. C. Clinical dementia rating: a reliable and valid diagnostic and staging measure for dementia of the Alzheimer type. Int. Psychogeriatr. 9, 173–176 (1997). source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Adherence was assessed by the total number of doses completed, counted by administrations in clinic, home diary records and pill bottle review.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Methods > Safety and adherence
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Given the exploratory nature of the pilot study, P values were not corrected for multiple comparisons unless otherwise noted in the text.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Methods > Statistical analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The study was monitored by an independent data and safety monitoring board, which reviewed the safety data on an annual basis.”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Methods > Safety and adherence
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper relies on this without support.
Cerebrospinal fluid concentrations of a drug indicate its central nervous system penetrance or exposure.
“Our primary objective was to measure CNS penetrance of D and Q.”
“Our results confirmed the presence of D in 4/5 participants’ CSF following treatment.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Changes in cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers over the open-label period reflect senolytic treatment effects rather than natural variation or disease progression.
“Biomarker data provided mechanistic insights of senolytic effects that need to be confirmed in fully powered, placebo-controlled studies.”
“our preliminary data suggest the potential of baseline to post-treatment changes in markers of cellular senescence and ADRD”
The paper relies on this without support.
Intermittent dosing lowers the risk of toxicity compared with continuous dosing.
“Intermittent dosing further reduces potential toxicity.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The measured senescence-associated secretory phenotype cytokines and chemokines are valid markers of senolytic target engagement in Alzheimer’s disease.
“to evaluate target engagement of D + Q by examining changes markers associated with cellular senescence and the SASP.”
“Biomarker data provided mechanistic insights of senolytic effects that need to be confirmed in fully powered, placebo-controlled studies.”
The paper relies on this without support.
In humans with Philadelphia chromosome-positive leukemia, dasatinib, unlike other tyrosine-kinase inhibitors such as imatinib, has shown usefulness in managing intracranial leukemic disease.
“Human cancer patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive leukemia are at risk of CNS relapse; D, but not other tyrosine-kinase inhibitors used to treat Philadelphia chromosome-positive leukemia (for example, imatinib), has shown useful in managing intracranial leukemic disease.”
The paper relies on this without support.
This study is the first in-human clinical trial and first report of senolytic treatment in humans with AD.
“As the first in-human clinical trial of senolytic therapy for AD, our study also provides important preliminary data on safety, tolerability and feasibility.”
“While our study provides the first report of senolytic treatment in humans with AD, there are several important limitations that must be considered.”
“In summary, we report findings from the first proof-of-concept, Phase I, open-label clinical trial of senolytic therapy for AD.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Sheep CSF pharmacokinetic data for quercetin can be extrapolated to humans in this study.
“If we extrapolate these results to our study, we assayed Q at a timepoint where it should have been detected in CSF, but the level would fall tenfold below the detection limits of our assay.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Senescent cells secrete the observed cytokines and chemokines as SASP factors.
“Given that senescent cells secrete these molecules as SASP factors, the observed reduction supports a decrease in senescent cell burden post-treatment.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“In the SToMP-AD pilot study, we previously reported a statistically significant, though modest and not clinically significant, increase in total cholesterol, as well as trends toward higher post-treatment total triglyceride levels and LDL cholesterol in the clinical lipid panel (P = 0.064; Supplementary Table 1 of the parent trial results [16])”
From Evaluation of exploratory fluid biomarkers from a phase 1 senolytic trial in mild Alzheimer's disease (2025) · cites this paper as [16]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“D/Q is currently being used in several clinical trials to deplete senescent cells46,50”
From Senescent-like microglia limit remyelination through the senescence associated secretory phenotype (2025) · cites this paper as [50]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Previous studies of systemic administration of senolytics have not included a control group, recruited only a limited number of patients with diabetes-associated chronic kidney disease (n = 9)32, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (n = 14)33, dementia (n = 5)11 or diabetic macular edema (n = 8)12 and were focused primarily on safety or biodistribution and a battery of SASP measures.”
From Effects of intermittent senolytic therapy on bone metabolism in postmenopausal women: a phase 2 randomized controlled trial (2024) · cites this paper as [11]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Other trials with DQ also reported relative safety of the treatment.29,30,32”
From A pilot study of senolytics to improve cognition and mobility in older adults at risk for Alzheimer's disease (2025) · cites this paper as [32]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Results indicated direct brain exposure to D and favorable safety and tolerability in participants with early-stage symptomatic AD [16].”
From Evaluation of exploratory fluid biomarkers from a phase 1 senolytic trial in mild Alzheimer's disease (2025) · cites this paper as [16]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Prior open label pilots reported a D + Q-associated reduction in circulating SASP factors [14], senescent cells in adipose and skin biopsies [15] and modest change in SASP-associated IL-6 [16].”
From Evaluation of exploratory fluid biomarkers from a phase 1 senolytic trial in mild Alzheimer's disease (2025) · cites this paper as [16]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“As with the data contained in the original report [16], P values were not corrected for multiple comparisons due to the small sample size and exploratory nature of these reported outcomes [33,34].”
From Evaluation of exploratory fluid biomarkers from a phase 1 senolytic trial in mild Alzheimer's disease (2025) · cites this paper as [16]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“These results are consistent with those data presented in the initial SToMP-AD pilot trial publication [16], which were measured with the Simoa HD-X analyzer (Quanterix, Lexington, MA) and Fujirebio G1200 (Malvern, PA, Lumipulse assay), further supporting the reliability of the results.”
From Evaluation of exploratory fluid biomarkers from a phase 1 senolytic trial in mild Alzheimer's disease (2025) · cites this paper as [16]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The increase in CSF IL-6 at the post-treatment visit compared to baseline is consistent with data we reported using the Mesoscale [16].”
From Evaluation of exploratory fluid biomarkers from a phase 1 senolytic trial in mild Alzheimer's disease (2025) · cites this paper as [16]
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“These results are consistent with those obtained via lipid panel lab testing, which are also expressed by volume, where a 28% post-treatment increasing trend was observed (P = 0.064) as previously reported [16].”
From Evaluation of exploratory fluid biomarkers from a phase 1 senolytic trial in mild Alzheimer's disease (2025) · cites this paper as [16]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“The application of senolytics for patients diagnosed with early-stage AD has recently been investigated, yielding preliminary findings that suggest a potential role for these agents in managing neurodegenerative diseases.79,80”
From Antiageing strategy for neurodegenerative diseases: from mechanisms to clinical advances (2025) · cites this paper as [80]
In the citing paper
“a small-scale phase 1 clinical trial has shown that senolytics are safe, feasible and well tolerated in AD patients, and related phase 2 clinical trials are ongoing.80”
From Antiageing strategy for neurodegenerative diseases: from mechanisms to clinical advances (2025) · cites this paper as [80]
Statistics that don’t add up
Each reported p-value recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“t(4) = 3.913, P = 0.008”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Abstract Cellular senescence contributes to Alzheimer’s disease (AD) pathogenesis. An open-label, proof-of-concept, phase I clinical trial of orally delivered senolytic therapy, dasatinib (D) and quercetin (Q), was conducted in early-stage symptomatic patients with AD to assess central nervous system (CNS) penetrance, safety, feasibility and efficacy. Five participants (mean age = 76 + 5 years; 40% female) completed the 12-week pilot study. D and Q levels in blood increased in all participants (12.7–73.5 ng ml−1 for D and 3.29–26.3 ng ml−1 for Q). In cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), D levels were detected in four participants (80%) ranging from 0.281 to 0.536 ml−1 with a CSF to plasma ratio of 0.422–0.919%; Q was not detected. The treatment was well-tolerated, with no early discontinuation. Secondary cognitive and neuroimaging endpoints did not significantly differ from baseline to post-treatment further supporting a favorable safety profile. CSF levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) increased (t(4) = 3.913, P = 0.008 and t(4) = 3.354, P = 0.028, respectively) with trending decreases in senescence-related cytokines and chemokines, and a trend toward higher Aβ42 levels (t(4) = −2.338, P = 0.079). In summary, CNS penetrance of D was observed with outcomes supporting safety, tolerability and feasibility in patients with AD. Biomarker data provided mechanistic insights of senolytic effects that need to be confirmed in fully powered, placebo-controlled studies. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04063124. Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is the most prevalent cause of dementia, a devastating condition that affects over 35 million individuals worldwide1. Historically, drug development for the indication of AD has been among the slowest, most expensive and least successful with a failure rate of over 99% (ref. 2). Recent years have seen the development of disease-modifying drugs capable of removing abnormal aggregations of amyloid beta (Aβ) from the brain3. Despite these successes, the anti-amyloid drugs have only yielded modest clinical results, spurring consideration of new drug targets and combination treatments3,4. The majority of individuals with AD present with multiple etiological contributors to dementia5, suggesting that therapeutic targets beyond Aβ and tau neuropathology may be important for maximum treatment benefits. Focusing on biological aging processes is an area of growing interest. Preclinical research has uncovered cellular senescence, a hallmark of aging, as a mechanism driving age-associated pathologies, including tau accumulation6–8. Cellular senescence is a complex stress response triggered by various stimuli, including those relevant to AD such as DNA damage, proteotoxic stress and mitochondrial dysfunction, among others9. The senescence stress response allows damaged cells to survive by upregulating senescent cell anti-apoptotic pathways (SCAPs)10 and causes inflammation through their senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP)11,12. The SASP comprises cytokines, chemokines, growth factors and extracellular matrix remodeling molecules, which can spread in a paracrine manner and propagate the senescent phenotype to neighboring cells9,13. In the context of aging and neurodegenerative disease, senescent cell accumulation has been identified in multiple cell types within the central nervous system (CNS), including neurons6,7,14,15, astrocytes16,17, microglia8,18, oligodendrocyte precursor cells19 and endothelial cells20. Pharmacologically clearing senescent cells using senolytics, drugs that selectively ablate senescent cells10, holds great clinical potential21. At present, dasatinib (D), a tyrosine-kinase inhibitor that is Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL)22, and quercetin (Q), a natural plant-derived flavonoid with anti-inflammatory, antioxidant and antineoplastic properties23 potentially by modulating autophagy24, are the best-characterized senolytics9. When combined, D + Q has been shown to selectively clear senescent cells in culture (100 nM D + 10 μM Q), in animal models (5 mg kg−1 D + 50 mg kg−1 Q) and humans (100 mg D + 1,000 mg Q) (refs. 9,10,21,25). Senolytic treatment follows an intermittent dosing strategy that reflects its mechanism of action, inducing senescent cell death10. Senescent cells accumulate slowly, and preclinical studies demonstrate that continuous treatment is not necessary. Instead, periodic clearance of senescent cells is sufficient to exert health benefits (reviewed26). Transcriptomic data from postmortem human AD brain tissue and AD mouse models revealed senescent cell signatures predicted to be responsive to D + Q therapy (that is, SCAPs), which were specifically associated with neurofibrillary tangle (NFT)-bearing neurons6,7. Using the rTg(tauP301L)4510 transgenic mouse model of tau pathogenesis, we found that biweekly administration of D + Q relative to placebo resulted in a 35% reduction in cortical NFT accumulation, which correlated with reduced cortical brain atrophy and restored aberrant cerebral blood flow6. Other research teams confirmed the association between tau and senescence in PS19 tau transgenic mice8 and the effective clearance of senescent cells using D + Q in the Tg(APP/PS1) Aβ-producing mouse model19. Given the compelling evidence provided by preclinical research6,19, coupled with the encouraging safety profiles reported in human studies of D + Q for other disease indications27,28, we conducted the first clinical trial of senolytic therapy for AD. The primary aim of the study was to evaluate the penetration of D and Q in the CNS and collect data on secondary outcomes including safety and feasibility, target engagement of the senolytic compounds and changes in CSF and plasma biomarkers relevant to AD, cognition, neuroimaging and functional status. We enrolled five participants with early-stage symptomatic AD in an open-label 12-week intervention of intermittent senolytic therapy and provide the first report of the trial outcomes.
Reported p = .008 · recomputed p = .017
Statistics recomputed
Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.
- Doesn’t add upt(4) = 3.913reported p = .008 · recomputed p = .017
“t(4) = 3.913, p = .008”
- Not confirmedt(4) = -2.338reported p = .079 · recomputed p = .080
“t(4) = −2.338, p = .079”
- Consistentt(4) = 3.354reported p = .028 · recomputed p = .028
“t(4) = 3.354, p = .028”
- Consistentt(4) = 2.34reported p = .0795 · recomputed p = .079
“t(4) = 2.34, p = .0795”
- Consistentt(4) = -1.12reported p = .32 · recomputed p = .325
“t(4) = −1.12, p = .32”
- Consistentt(4) = 0.56reported p = .61 · recomputed p = .605
“t(4) = 0.56, p = .61”
- Consistentt(4) = 0.96reported p = .39 · recomputed p = .391
“t(4) = 0.96, p = .39”
- Consistentt(4) = 2.904reported p = .044 · recomputed p = .044
“t(4) = 2.904, p = .044”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“ranging from 0.281 to 0.536 ml−1”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Abstract
Reported 0.536 · recomputed 0.255
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Results > ADRD biomarkers
“there was a trend (t(4) = 2.34, P = 0.0795, 95% confidence interval (CI): −170.6 to 14.6) toward higher Aβ42 levels post-treatment”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Abstract
“a trend toward higher Aβ42 levels (t(4) = −2.338, P = 0.079)”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Abstract
“a trend toward higher Aβ42 levels (t(4) = −2.338, P = 0.079)”
§ Senolytic therapy in mild Alzheimer’s disease: a phase 1 feasibility trial > Results > ADRD biomarkers
“there was a trend (t(4) = 2.34, P = 0.0795, 95% confidence interval (CI): −170.6 to 14.6) toward higher Aβ42 levels post-treatment”
Citations
Cites
The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment
Nasreddine, Z. S., Phillips, N. A., Bédirian, V., Charbonneau, S., Whitehead, V., Collin, I., Cummings, J. L., & Chertkow, H. (2005) · Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53221.x · Cited by 25,553
Dietary Intake and Bioavailability of Polyphenols
Scalbert, A., & Williamson, G. (2000) · The Journal of Nutrition · doi:10.1093/jn/130.8.2073s · Cited by 3,658 · cited 1×
“Q is found in many fruits and vegetables 34,35 .”
The role of senescent cells in ageing
van Deursen, J. M. (2014) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature13193 · Cited by 2,623
The Achilles' heel of senescent cells: from transcriptome to senolytic drugs
Zhu, Y., Tchkonia, T., Pirtskhalava, T., Gower, A. C., Ding, H., Giorgadze, N., Palmer, A. K., Ikeno, Y., Hubbard, G. B., Lenburg, M., et al. (2015) · Aging Cell · doi:10.1111/acel.12344 · Cited by 2,584 · cited 5×
“The senescence stress response allows damaged cells to survive by upregulating senescent cell anti-apoptotic pathways (SCAPs) 10 and causes inflammation through their senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP) 11,12 .”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationA complex secretory program orchestrated by the inflammasome controls paracrine senescence
Acosta, J. C., Banito, A., Wuestefeld, T., Georgilis, A., Janich, P., Morton, J. P., Athineos, D., Kang, T.-W., Lasitschka, F., Andrulis, M., et al. (2013) · Nature Cell Biology · doi:10.1038/ncb2784 · Cited by 2,278 · cited 1×
“The SASP comprises cytokines, chemokines, growth factors and extracellular matrix remodeling molecules, which can spread in a paracrine manner and propagate the senescent phenotype to neighboring cells 9,13 .”
Background(2015) · HAL · Cited by 2,238
Health effects of quercetin: From antioxidant to nutraceutical
Boots, A. W., Haenen, G. R. M. M., & Bast, A. (2008) · European Journal of Pharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.ejphar.2008.03.008 · Cited by 2,121
Jack, C. R., Albert, M. S., Knopman, D. S., McKhann, G. M., Sperling, R. A., Carrillo, M. C., Thies, B., & Phelps, C. H. (2011) · Alzheimer's & Dementia · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2011.03.004 · Cited by 2,042
Morris, J. C. (1997) · International Psychogeriatrics · doi:10.1017/s1041610297004870 · Cited by 1,641
Benedict, R. H. B., Schretlen, D., Groninger, L., & Brandt, J. (1998) · The Clinical Neuropsychologist · doi:10.1076/clin.12.1.43.1726 · Cited by 1,597
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Iwashina, T. Flavonoid properties of five families newly incorporated into the order Caryophyllales. Bull. Natl Mus. Nat. Sci. B 39, 25–51 (2013).
- Psychological Corporation. WMS-IV: Wechsler Memory Scale 4th Edition: Administration and Scoring Manual (Harcourt, Brace, & Company, 2009).
- Kaplan, E., Goodglass, H. & Weintraub, S. Boston Naming Test (2nd (BNT-2), Second Edition (Pro-Ed, 2001).
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 201–284 of 284
Advances in the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease
Goceroglu, R. T., & Hacımüftüoğlu, A. (2026) · Frontiers in Pharmacology · doi:10.3389/fphar.2026.1819165 · Cited by 1
Targeting innovative therapeutic approaches to the hallmarks of aging to combat Alzheimer’s disease
Izrael, M., & Frenkel, O. M. (2025) · Neural Regeneration Research · doi:10.4103/nrr.nrr-d-25-00966 · Cited by 1
Early-stage research and new pharmacological targets in Alzhei-mer's dementia
Grecu, M., Romila, A., Moldovanu, S., Condratovici-Plesa, A., Anghel, L., Oprea, V. D., & Bocancia, L. A. (2026) · Balneo and PRM Research Journal · doi:10.12680/balneo.2026.1024 · Cited by 2
Senotherapeutics: Emerging pharmacological strategies to target cellular senescence
Nagy, D., Brunner, E., Ekambaram, S., Nagaraja, R. Y., Kordestan, K. V., Patai, R., Kristóf, R., Nagykaldi, M., Chandragiri, S. S., Shanmugarama, S., et al. (2026) · Advances in Translational Research · doi:10.1556/1661.2026.00015 · Cited by 1
Zainuddin, M.-S., Pamidi, N., Azman, A. S., Magalingam, K. B., & Bhuvanendran, S. (2026) · Redox Report · doi:10.1080/13510002.2026.2677396 · Cited by 1
Zamani, N. I. S. M., Hamezah, H. S., Mediani, A., Ghazali, M., Sadikan, M. Z., & Jam, F. A. (2026) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-026-53311-y · Cited by 2
Senescence and Beyond: Exploring Senolytic Strategies for Chronic Disease
Srivastava, M., Ampeti, S., Sheikh, R. B., Kirankumar, P. N., & Sali, S. R. (2025) · medtigo Journal of Medicine · doi:10.63096/medtigo30612313 · Cited by 1
Neurotheranostics in Alzheimer's Disease: Current concepts and experimental strategies
Yanagisawa, D., Ohgita, T., Kawashima, H., Yoshikawa, H., Saito, H., Tooyama, I., & Takata, K. (2026) · Pharmacology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1016/j.pharmthera.2026.109084 · Cited by 1
He, Q., Yu, H. Q., Zhou, X., Yang, K., Xiao, W., Gao, Z., & He, Q. (2025) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2025.1593188 · Cited by 2
Advancing Alzheimer's disease treatment: A literature review on senolytic intervention
Onuh, V. C. (2025) · Journal of Alzheimer s Disease · doi:10.1177/13872877251376540 · Cited by 2
New Horizons in Myotonic Dystrophy Type 1: Cellular Senescence as a Therapeutic Target
Légaré, C., Berglund, J. A., Duchesne, É., & Dumont, N. A. (2024) · BioEssays · doi:10.1002/bies.202400216 · Cited by 1
Feng, Y., Ma, J., Zhu, B., Yue, D., & Wang, Y. (2025) · Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Gene Regulatory Mechanisms · doi:10.1016/j.bbagrm.2025.195090 · Cited by 2
Guan, Y., Bai, X., Li, C., Zhang, Z., He, Q., Chen, L., Xie, Y., & Wang, Z. (2025) · Genes & Diseases · doi:10.1016/j.gendis.2025.101871 · Cited by 4
Su, H. N., Ma, R., Su, D., Tan, C., Zhu, Y., & Yang, X. (2026) · European Journal of Histochemistry · doi:10.4081/ejh.2026.4537 · Cited by 2
Genetics of Cardiac Aging Implicate Organ-Specific VariationPreprint
Brundage, J., Barrios, J. P., Tison, G. H., & Pirruccello, J. P. (2024) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2024.08.02.24310874 · Cited by 1
Yao, M., Liu, A., Xing, L., Song, J., Yang, Y., Yue, X., & Li, H. (2026) · Ageing Research Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.arr.2026.103260 · Cited by 1
Clinical Features of Cellular Senescence Pathways in Severe Asthma
Song, W., Kermani, N. Z., Versi, A., Sánchez‐Ovando, S., Simpson, J. L., Wark, P. A., Baines, K. J., Dahlén, S., Djukanović, R., Guo, Y., et al. (2026) · Allergy · doi:10.1111/all.70416 · Cited by 1
Fernández, P., Hughes, R. M., Matthews, H. F., Duffen, J., Haloub, R., Schapira, A. H. V., & Stott, S. (2026) · Journal of Parkinson s Disease · doi:10.1177/1877718x261434686 · Cited by 1
Targeting inflammaging in Alzheimer’s disease: molecular pathways and emerging pharmacotherapies
Alotaibi, M. O., Al‐kuraishy, H. M., Fahad, E. H., Abdelaziz, A. M., & Batiha, G. E. (2026) · Inflammopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s10787-026-02281-8 · Cited by 3
Targets of senescence in cardiac muscle: insights for regenerative treatments in the aged heart
Ellison, G. M., & Torella, D. (2026) · Expert Opinion on Therapeutic Targets · doi:10.1080/14728222.2026.2671690
Cheung, N. (2026) · Frontiers in Aging · doi:10.3389/fragi.2026.1856979
Jiang, Q., & Yan-Jiang, W. A. N. G. (2026) · Shengming kexue · doi:10.3724/cbls.2026100
The role of senescence in kidney ageing, injury and fibrosis
Janas, P. P., Mason, T., & Ferenbach, D. A. (2026) · Nature Reviews Nephrology · doi:10.1038/s41581-026-01123-8
Sirtuins in the pathogenetic therapy of neurodegenerative diseases
Samoilova, E. M., Ivanova, A. A., Laktionov, P. P., Анатольевич, К. В., & Romanov, S. E. (2024) · Journal of clinical practice · doi:10.17816/clinpract624496
Tau-targeting pharmacological strategies in neurodegenerative disease
Zheng, H., & Zheng, J. (2026) · Trends in Pharmacological Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tips.2026.07.008
Huang, J., Li, Y., Li, W., Luo, Z., & Liu, J. (2026) · Phytomedicine · doi:10.1016/j.phymed.2026.158294
Rashmi, R., Gamit, M., Singh, G., Balachandar, R., & Kharkwal, G. B. (2026) · International Immunopharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.intimp.2026.117022
Qu, J., Yang, J., Li, W., Zeng, X., He, X., Guo, H., Lu, J., Jiang, X., Zhuang, X., Qian, C., et al. (2026) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2026.08.022
Wati, M. P. P., Laksemi, D. A. A. S., & Ruma, I. M. W. (2026) · Neurologico Spinale Medico Chirurgico · doi:10.4103/nsmc.nsmc_11_26
Venkei, Z. G., & Savelieff, M. G. (2026) · Exploration of neuroscience · doi:10.37349/en.2026.1006139
Makhlouf, H., Dorigatti, A. O., Hernandez, S. F., de Rosa, N., Miller, L. R., Hussong, S. A., Holstein, D. M., Lechleiter, J. D., Logan, S., Kayed, R., et al. (2026) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.64898/2026.09.08.750215
Case Studies and Patents in Alzheimer’s Disease Research
Kumar, D., Anand, P., Tiwari, J., & Singh, S. N. (2026) · BENTHAM SCIENCE PUBLISHERS eBooks · doi:10.2174/9798898814953126010016
Dai, D., Zhu, J., Gao, M. Q., Wang, K., Daneshgar, N., Yang, X., Hahn, V. S., Talor, M. V., Čiháková, D., Rosenberg, A. Z., et al. (2026) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.64898/2026.04.13.718331
McFall, D. J., Hussain, A. I., Cho, M., & Forcelli, P. A. (2026) · Epilepsia · doi:10.1002/epi.70226 · Cited by 1
Abuhassan, Q., Saeed, T. N., Al-Hussainy, A. F., Roopashree, R., Mishra, S., Nanda, A., Mukherjee, G., Rizaev, J., Taher, S. G., Alwan, M., et al. (2026) · Journal of Molecular Neuroscience · doi:10.1007/s12031-026-02532-x · Cited by 1
Protein kinase inhibitors for treatment of Alzheimer’s disease
Kim, C. (2026) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-45844-6.00012-3
Stephan, P., Plassard, D., Keyes, W. M., & Hérault, Y. (2026) · Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences · doi:10.1007/s00018-026-06079-3
Microglial senescence and senolytic drugs
Ben-Azu, B., Sabbah, S., Awogbindin, I. O., Chidebe, E. O., Oritsemuelebi, B., Patel, D., Frenkel, D., & Tremblay, M. (2026) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-27340-7.00010-3
Koning, M., Kovynev, A., Fondevila, M. F., Ruhé, E. J. M., Mommersteeg, M. C., Ramakers, C. R. B., Hutten, B. A., Verwer, B. J., Vlug, M. S., Kuiper, T., et al. (2026) · Nature Metabolism · doi:10.1038/s42255-026-01643-4 · Cited by 1
Self-citationPlasminogen Activator Inhibitor 1, Cell Senescence, and Aging-Related Diseases
Liu, R.-M., & Nakamya, M. F. (2026) · Cells · doi:10.3390/cells15060551 · Cited by 1
Cellular senescence: the “hidden driver” in chronic inflammatory skin disorders
Liang, H., Li, J., & Zhang, K. (2026) · Immunity & Ageing · doi:10.1186/s12979-026-00580-w · Cited by 1
Lipophagy and lipid droplets in neurodegeneration
McKee, N. W., Jing, Y., Serdah, R., Thulasingam, S., Lopez, X. S., & Tan, E. P. (2026) · Trends in Pharmacological Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tips.2026.08.004
Marín‐Maldonado, F., Santiago-Rosario, M. J., Fonseca‐Ferrer, W., Vlaar, C. P., Martínez‐Ferrer, M., Colón‐Sáez, J. O., & Duconge-Soler, J. (2026) · Frontiers in Aging · doi:10.3389/fragi.2026.1863781
Viteri, J. A., Kerr, N. R., Brennan, C. D., Kick, G. R., Wang, M., Ketabforoush, A. H. M. E., Snyder, H., Moore, P. J., Darvishi, F. B., Dashtmian, A. R., et al. (2026) · Neurobiology of Disease · doi:10.1016/j.nbd.2026.107610 · Cited by 1
Olinger, B., Anerillas, C., Herman, A. B., Tsitsipatis, D., Banarjee, R., Tanaka, T., Candia, J., Maragkakis, M., Bandinelli, S., Walker, K. A., et al. (2026) · doi:10.64898/2026.02.06.26345739
Senescent cell heterogeneity in brain aging and neurodegenerative disease
Graves, S. I., Vasques, P. D. C., & Baker, D. J. (2026) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2026.06.020
Luo, L., Yan, T., Liu, W., 高颖, Tang, X., Yang, L., & Zhao, M. (2026) · Neural Regeneration Research · doi:10.4103/nrr.nrr-d-25-00660
Olinger, B., & Basisty, N. (2026) · Ageing Research Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.arr.2026.103254 · Cited by 2
Multitargeted drug strategies for Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s diseases
Khan, A. U., Abdullah, A., Naqvi, S. F., Tahir, H., Khalid, H., Sarfraz, H., & Khan, Y. (2026) · Zeitschrift für Naturforschung C · doi:10.1515/znc-2026-0116
SENOLYTIC COMBINATION OF DASATINIB AND QUERCETIN: A REVIEW OF PRECLINICAL AND CLINICAL STUDIES
Morozov, I. I., Molkanov, N. N., & Kiseleva, N. M. (2025) · Медико-фармацевтический журнал «Пульс» · doi:10.26787/nydha-2686-6838-2026-28-1-49-58
The quest to turn back the clock
Bhambra, R. (2023) · Biopharma Dealmakers · doi:10.1038/d43747-023-00126-9
Cellular senescence: six decades of discovery and reinvention
Klaver, M., Steeneken, L. S., Veeningen, N., Altulea, A., & Demaria, M. (2026) · The EMBO Journal · doi:10.1038/s44318-026-00922-w
Biomaterials regulate cellular senescence for the treatment of H. pylori-related gastric cancer
Gong, Y., Chen, Y., Zhang, T., Xu, Z., Wu, Y., Li, Z., Du, Y., & Gao, J. (2026) · TransMed · doi:10.1016/j.tmed.2026.100055
Aging of the vascular system: proposal of preventive intervention with known natural substances
Fazio, S., Fazio, V., & Affuso, F. (2025) · Exploration of Cardiology · doi:10.37349/ec.2025.101268
Fluidic Programmable Gravi-maze Array for High Throughput Multiorgan Drug TestingPreprint
Wong, H. C., Collins, C. J., Jose, J. A. J., Villegas, A. J., Bhakta, I. N., Collins, A. J., Katara, G., Kohana, J., Saluja, H. S., & Collins, J. P. (2025) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2025.06.18.660241
González-Meljem, J. M., Haston, S., Gallage, S., Innes, A. J., & Scheckhuber, C. Q. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-76469-1_2
Future perspectives: personalized medicine and senescence modulation in cardiovascular health
Nissar, I., Uppal, J., Gayaz, M., Chawla, A., Mohi-ud-din, R., Hussain, M. S., Mir, R. H., & Ahmad, A. (2026) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-45811-8.00008-8
Homeostatic conflict as a driver for brain aging
Wulkop-Gil, C. A., & Petrascheck, M. (2026) · Frontiers in Genetics · doi:10.3389/fgene.2026.1881856
Multifacet Roles of Cellular Senescence in Cancer: Mechanisms and Therapeutic Implications
Mao, H., Liu, W., Su, Y., Ma, Y., Zhao, X., & Lu, Y. (2026) · MedComm – Oncology · doi:10.1002/mog2.70060 · Cited by 1
Alzheimer’s Disease in the Era of Geroscience: Mechanisms, Biomarkers, and Therapeutic Prospects
Chmielewski, P. P. (2026) · Cells · doi:10.3390/cells15171599
Discovery of a quinoline-based senomorphic agent for the treatment of chronic kidney disease
Chen, Y., Qiao, S., Chen, X. W., 李林芬, Wu, J., Shi, C., Li, J., Guo, Y., Huang, Y., & Liu, W. (2026) · European Journal of Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1016/j.ejmech.2026.119164 · Cited by 1
Bilder, G. E., & Brown-O’Hara, P. (2025) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-84831-5_10
Vascular cognitive impairment and dementia: current understanding and future directions
Garg, S., & McCullough, L. D. (2026) · npj Dementia · doi:10.1038/s44400-026-00135-2
Mancuso, C. (2025) · Antioxidants · doi:10.3390/antiox14101237 · Cited by 1
Neuroinflammation-targeted natural products for the therapy of Alzheimer’s disease
Chaweewan, S., Cui, K., Zhang, Y., Mao, J., Zheng, J., & Wan, Y. (2026) · Model Organisms Research · doi:10.1016/j.mores.2026.100004 · Cited by 1
Sharma, P., & Bhattacharyya, S. (2026) · Stem Cell Reviews and Reports · doi:10.1007/s12015-026-11117-5
Partial Reprogramming Is Conserved from Insect to Mammal
Tolwinski, N. S., Fong, S., Shankar, S., & Gruber, J. (2026) · Cells · doi:10.3390/cells15020168
Blomquist, S. A., Kelly, G., D’Adamo, C. R., Han, C., Parker, H., Adães, S., Gardner, C. R., Ardagh, A., Ramer, S., & Scuba, W. (2026) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms27104406 · Cited by 1
Transplanting ANXA1⁻ CD8⁺ Naïve T cells Delay Aging Through SenolysisPreprint
Wu, Y., Guo, S. Z., Zhang, F., Lou, F., Li, Y. Y., Sun, Y., Shen, Q., Zhao, L., Cai, X., Wang, Z., et al. (2026) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.64898/2026.02.21.707223
Kecskés, S., Makra, P., Monostori, T., Veréb, Z., Bari, F., Menyhárt, Á., & Farkas, E. (2026) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.64898/2026.04.24.720745
Han, H., Hou, L., Lu, J., Sun, H., Ning, W., Liang, Y., Gu, Y., Yin, H., & Gao, Q. (2026) · Frontiers in Endocrinology · doi:10.3389/fendo.2026.1809245
Anti-inflammatory and immunomodulating agents
Britten, J. L. (2025) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-30008-0.00014-4
Astrocyte Structure–Function Relationship in Senescence and Neurodegeneration
Serebryanaya, D. V., Kolgaeva, K. A., Dya, G. A., Ermakov, I. M., & Belousov, V. V. (2026) · Biochemistry (Moscow) · doi:10.1134/s000629792660208x
ВЛИЯНИЕ ГЕРОПРОТЕКТОРОВ НА ПРОДОЛЖИТЕЛЬНОСТЬ ЖИЗНИ: МЕХАНИЗМЫ ДЕЙСТВИЯ И КЛИНИЧЕСКИЙ ПОТЕНЦИАЛ
Petintseva, A., & Эрдман, В. В. (2026) · Успехи геронтологии · doi:10.34922/ae.2026.39.1.002
Telomeric autophagy in human health, aging, and diseases
Li, X., & Wu, X. (2026) · Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences · doi:10.3389/fmolb.2026.1922188
Mesenchymal Stem Cell Therapy and Its Clinical Application Potential
Zhang, L. (2025) · Biochemistry · doi:10.5772/intechopen.1012366
Correas, Á. G., Stromsnes, K., Lupu, R. I., & González, G. O. (2025) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-52641-1_29-1 · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Gonzales, M. M., Garbarino, V. R., Kautz, T. F., Palavicini, J. P., Lopez-Cruzan, M., Dehkordi, S. K., Mathews, J. J., Zare, H., Xu, P., Zhang, B., Franklin, C., Habes, M., Craft, S., Petersen, R. C., Tchkonia, T., Kirkland, J. L., Salardini, A., Seshadri, S., Musi, N., & Orr, M. E.
- Affiliations
- The University of Texas at San Antonio Health Science Center (US)
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
- Wake Forest University Health Sciences (US)
- Mayo Clinic (US)
- Boston University (US)
- Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (US)
- W. G. (Bill) Hefner VA Medical Center (US)
- Corresponding author
- Gonzales, Mitzi M.
- Orr, Miranda E.
- ORCID
- Gonzales, Mitzi M.
- Garbarino, Valentina R.
- Kautz, Tiffany F.
- Palavicini, Juan Pablo
- Lopez-Cruzan, Marisa
- Dehkordi, Shiva Kazempour
- Zare, Habil
- Xu, Peng
- Zhang, Bin
- Franklin, Crystal
- Habes, Mohamad
- Craft, Suzanne
- Petersen, Ronald C.
- Tchkonia, Tamara
- Kirkland, James L.
- Salardini, Arash
- Seshadri, Sudha
- Musi, Nicolas
- Orr, Miranda E.
- Venue
- Nature Medicine
- Published
- 2023-09-07
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 2481-2488
- ISSN
- 1078-8956 (ISSN-L)
- 1546-170X
- PMC
- PMC10875739
- OpenAlex
- W4386499275
- Semantic Scholar
- 2ee79748e0e0d4899ab78f5e67ab81ad82b3928f
- Cited by
- 334
- References
- 62
- Citations by year
- 2026: 111 · 2025: 118 · 2024: 84 · 2023: 21
- FWCI
- 32.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Nature Medicine (publishedVersion)
- Research Square (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- ScholarWorks @ UTRGV (The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Alzheimer’s Drug Discovery Foundation (GC-201908-2019443)
- U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | National Institute on Aging (U24AG059624, R01AG068293, P30AG044271, R01AG077472, P30AG066546, T32AG021890, PG30AG044271, P30AG013319, U01AG22307, R01AG057896, 1RF1AG063507, 1R01AG0665241A, 1R01AG065301, P30 AG066546, U01AG046170, R01AG068030, R01AG080821, P30AG072947, P30 AG062677, U01 AG006786, U24 AG057437, U19 AG024904, R33AG061456, R37AG13925, P01AG062413, R01AG066524, R01AG054076, R01AG033193, RF1AG059421, U54AG07594, R01AG069690, R01AG075684)
- American Federation for Aging Research
- U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (I01BX005717)
- U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R21NS125171, RF1NS112391, U19NS115388, UF1 NS125417, R01NS017950)
- Hevolution Foundation
- Institute for Integration of Medicine & Science and the Center for Biomedical Neurosciences at UT Health Science Center in San Antonio
- U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (TR002647)
- Institute for Integration of Medicine & Science at UT Health Science Center in San Antonio. Center for Biomedical Neurosciences at UT Health Science Center in San Antonio.
- Cure Alzheimer’s Fund
- GHR Foundation
- Alzheimer’s Association (PTC REG-20-651687)
- Connor Fund Robert J. and Theresa W. Ryan Noaber Foundation
- National Heart and Lung Institute (R01HL105756)
- JMR Barker Foundation; Bill and Rebecca Reed Endowments for Precision Medicine and Palliative Care; Kleberg/McGill Foundation; UT STARS
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Telomeres, Telomerase, and Senescence
- Keywords
- senolytic therapy, Alzheimer's disease, cellular senescence, dasatinib, quercetin, cerebrospinal fluid drug concentration, CNS penetration, amyloid-beta, tau protein, interleukin-6, glial fibrillary acidic protein, astrocytes, cytokines and chemokines, safety and tolerability, early Alzheimer's disease, oral drug delivery
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review