This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.
What Ubidecarenone does in the body
Taken for heart health and energy, and especially by people on statins for muscle aches
Every cell makes its energy by passing electrons down a chain of proteins inside mitochondria, and coenzyme Q10 is the shuttle that carries electrons between two of those proteins. Your body makes its own, using the same chemical pathway that statins block to lower cholesterol — which is why statins lower blood CoQ10 and why it seemed obvious that replacing it would fix statin muscle pain. That reasoning is clean, the blood levels really do fall, and when the idea was tested in people whose statin muscle pain had been confirmed by rechallenge, giving them CoQ10 did not help.
What happened in people
In rechallenge-confirmed statin myalgia, CoQ10 changed neither pain, strength nor VO2max despite a fourfold rise in serum CoQ10
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The recorded finding that sits closest to something a person would notice. Written into the record, not signed off, and it carries no population or interval.
2 registered substances share the start of this name, which is why a search for it can return more than one thing.
FDA substance registry · EJ27X76M46 · read 2026-08-29
Where each sentence above came from
No recorded sentence describes the change this makes in a way that stands on its own. The page opens with what it is taken for instead, and the recorded explanation follows below.
Shown as the opening line on this page.
A limit recorded against this substance. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The four opening statements run to 133 words.
Words this page uses
Four words worth knowing first
Chosen from what this page shows, with each one explained before the word it depends on.
Stand-in result
A stand-in result is a number measured because the real result takes too long.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like judging a journey by the speedometer rather than by arriving.
Where that stops being true. Speed does predict arrival. Many stand-in results do not predict the real one.
What people get wrong. A stand-in result is often reported as the result itself.
A surrogate endpoint substituted for a clinical endpoint, valid only where the substitution has been shown to hold.
Randomisation
Randomisation means chance decides who gets which treatment.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like a coin toss deciding the groups.
Where that stops being true. A coin toss is fair once. Fairness here comes from doing it for everyone.
What people get wrong. It is thought to make groups identical. It makes them similar on average, including on things nobody measured.
Allocation of participants to arms by a chance process, so that unmeasured factors are balanced in expectation.
Absolute difference
An absolute difference is how many more people in a hundred were affected.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like counting heads in two rooms of a hundred.
Where that stops being true. Heads are easy to count. Study results carry a margin of error too.
What people get wrong. It is confused with a percentage change, which can look far larger.
The arithmetic difference in event rates between arms.
Confidence interval
A confidence interval is the range the true answer is likely to sit in.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like a weather forecast giving a range rather than one number.
Where that stops being true. A forecast range covers tomorrow. This one covers what the study could resolve.
What people get wrong. The middle number is read as the answer. A range crossing zero means no change is still possible.
An interval estimate that would contain the true parameter in a stated proportion of repeated studies.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What was measured, goal by goal
One row for each goal a registered study measured something for. One column for each kind of thing that could be measured.
Registered studies list 40 outcome measures that RNAWiki could read. A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. 0 of the matched studies tested this substance, and 0 posted a result.
There is no single score. A strong test result and a weak life result are different facts.
Goals down the side, kinds of measurement across the top. Each cell says what kind of thing was registered, not what was found.
Goal
Life outcome
What a body can do
How a person feels
A test result
A step in the body
Harms
How long
Who was studied
Fertility and sexual health
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a performance measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a symptom measure for this goal.
△Only a number moved1 registered test measure.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a body-step measure for this goal.
—Not recordedHarms were not a registered measure for this goal.
—Not recordedNo finished study window is recorded.
…Waiting for a reviewerWho was studied is listed further down the page.
Blood sugar
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a performance measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a symptom measure for this goal.
△Only a number moved2 registered test measure.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a body-step measure for this goal.
—Not recordedHarms were not a registered measure for this goal.
—Not recordedNo finished study window is recorded.
…Waiting for a reviewerWho was studied is listed further down the page.
Focus
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a performance measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a symptom measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a test result for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a body-step measure for this goal.
—Not recordedHarms were not a registered measure for this goal.
—Not recordedNo finished study window is recorded.
…Waiting for a reviewerWho was studied is listed further down the page.
Recovery
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a performance measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a symptom measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a test result for this goal.
○Only a body step1 registered body-step measure.
—Not recordedHarms were not a registered measure for this goal.
—Not recordedNo finished study window is recorded.
…Waiting for a reviewerWho was studied is listed further down the page.
Which registered measures put each goal on this table
Fertility and sexual health
sperm concentration in semen; sperm motility in semen; sperm morphology in semen
Blood sugar
insulin/glucose after overnight fast; insuline/glucose after an oralglucose tolerance test
Focus
attention; working memory performance
Recovery
phosphocreatine recovery
Sorted by fixed word lists, version v1. A name the rules do not recognise stays unsorted rather than moving to the nearest column.
What each mark on this table means
∅ Nothing in the sources checked
No registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
△ Only a number moved
1 registered test measure.
— Not recorded
Harms were not a registered measure for this goal.
… Waiting for a reviewer
Who was studied is listed further down the page.
○ Only a body step
1 registered body-step measure.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What happened in people
Each card is one study: the exact question it asked, who was in it, and whether it showed what it set out to show.
Composite major adverse cardiovascular events at 2 years by time to first event; short-term NYHA class, six-minute walk and NT-proBNP at 16 weeks
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
Q-SYMBIO — coenzyme Q10 in chronic heart failure
How many people
420
Study design
Randomised double-blind placebo-controlled multicentre, 2 years
Compared against
A dummy treatment
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Long-term composite 15% versus 26%, hazard ratio 0.50 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.80), P = 0.003; cardiovascular mortality 9% versus 16%, P = 0.026; all-cause mortality 10% versus 18%, P = 0.018
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. The primary short-term endpoints at 16 weeks — NYHA class, six-minute walk distance and NT-proBNP — showed no significant changes. A mortality benefit with null physiological endpoints is an unusual shape, and 420 patients is small for a hard endpoint.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral capsule or softgel, as ubiquinone or ubiquinol, usually in an oil base
Interval reported. 95% CI 0
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
Brief Pain Inventory severity and interference, muscle strength and maximal oxygen uptake
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
Taylor 2015 — CoQ10 in rechallenge-confirmed statin myalgia
How many people
41
Study design
Randomised double-blind, following an 8-week crossover confirmation phase
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
Measured performance
What was found
Pain severity P = 0.53 and interference P = 0.56 for CoQ10 assignment; strength and VO2max all P > 0.10; more subjects reported pain on CoQ10, 14 of 20 versus 7 of 18, P = 0.05
Repeated elsewhere
Replicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. Serum CoQ10 rose fourfold on supplementation, which rules out under-dosing as an explanation. Only 41 of 120 screened patients reproduced their myalgia under blinding, which is itself a finding about statin intolerance.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral capsule or softgel, as ubiquinone or ubiquinol, usually in an oil base
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
Worsening 6.9 points placebo, 7.5 points on 1,200 mg/day (P = .49), 8.0 points on 2,400 mg/day (P = .21); terminated at a prespecified futility criterion
Repeated elsewhere
Failed to Replicate
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. Both active arms showed slight adverse trends relative to placebo. The trial followed a Phase II study that had suggested possible benefit, the standard pattern of a small promising signal failing an adequately powered test.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral capsule or softgel, as ubiquinone or ubiquinol, usually in an oil base
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
Cardiovascular mortality and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
KiSel-10 (Alehagen 2013) — selenium and coenzyme Q10 in elderly Swedes
How many people
443
Study design
Prospective randomised double-blind placebo-controlled, 5 years
Compared against
A dummy treatment
Kind of result
Living longer, or avoiding a major event
What was found
Reduced cardiovascular mortality and reduced NT-proBNP on combined selenium and coenzyme Q10 versus placebo over five years
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. A combination intervention, so no effect is attributable to CoQ10 alone. Sweden has among the lowest dietary selenium in Europe, making this plausibly a repletion study in a selenium-insufficient population.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral capsule or softgel, as ubiquinone or ubiquinol, usually in an oil base
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
RNAWiki holds 4 written-up human studies for this substance, each with the question it asked.
How we know it
Each card names the study, the number of people and what the study set out to measure.
What this does not prove
These summaries were written by a person and have not been signed off as reviewed claims.
Why it matters
A study that failed is as informative as one that worked, and both are here.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim exists, so no exact population, effect size or interval is published yet.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How close this is to real life
The top step is something a person would feel or care about. The bottom is a guess from software. Filled steps are where evidence exists for this substance.
□Living longer, or avoiding a major eventNo evidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.No registered study measures this.
■What a body can do day to dayEvidence recorded. Walking, dressing, breathing, recovering.1 registered measure of this kind.
■Measured performanceEvidence recorded. How much was lifted, how far was run, how fast.1 registered measure of this kind.
■Symptoms and quality of lifeEvidence recorded. Pain, tiredness, mood, sleep, as the person rated it.2 registered measures of this kind.
■A number that stands in for healthEvidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.9 registered measures of this kind.
■A step measured inside a personEvidence recorded. Something measured in human tissue or human cells.1 registered measure inside human tissue.
□AnimalsNo evidence recorded. Mice, rats, dogs. Useful for ideas, not proof about people.No animal record is stored.
□Cells in a dishNo evidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.No cell or bench record is stored.
□A guess from softwareNo evidence recorded. Nobody measured it. RNAWiki never publishes one as a finding.RNAWiki stores no prediction for this record. Software can suggest a link. RNAWiki does not publish one as a finding.
Higher on these steps means closer to something a person would feel. It does not mean better done.
What it changes in the body◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
The path through the body
From what a person takes to what changes. A solid line is a step measured in people. A dashed line is a step nobody has measured that way.
Start
Ubidecarenone
What a person takes: Oral capsule or softgel, as ubiquinone or ubiquinol, usually in an oil base.
The measurement behind this step
Sold in the United States as a dietary supplement under DSHEA, so no agency reviewed efficacy, safety or content before sale. Absorption is poor, lipid-dependent and highly variable, so formulation influences exposure more than label dose does, and any bioavailability claim should be judged on measured serum concentrations. Ubiquinol oxidises to ubiquinone in air, so a product's stated redox state is not verifiable at the point of use. Synthetic material can contain the non-natural cis isomer, which fermentation-derived material does not. Doses across the trial literature span more than an order of magnitude, from 300 mg per day in Q-SYMBIO to 2,400 mg per day in QE3.
Getting in
Absorption is poor, variable, and the main practical constraint
CoQ10 is a big, greasy molecule and very little of a swallowed dose gets into the blood. How it is formulated changes absorption more than how much you take.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
The ten-isoprene tail makes CoQ10 almost insoluble in water, with slow, lipid-dependent and highly variable absorption. In the statin myalgia trial, 600 mg per day of ubiquinol raised serum CoQ10 from 1.3 +/- 0.4 to 5.2 +/- 2.3 micrograms per millilitre — a fourfold increase, which establishes that inadequate absorption cannot explain that trial's null result.
It travels on LDL, which confuses every statin measurement
In the blood, CoQ10 is carried by LDL particles. Statins lower LDL, so they lower measured CoQ10 partly by lowering its transport, not necessarily by depleting tissue.
──Measured in people. Written by a person from the study named beside the step. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The measurement behind this step
Plasma CoQ10 is carried predominantly on LDL, so plasma CoQ10 concentration covaries with LDL cholesterol. A statin-associated fall in plasma CoQ10 therefore conflates reduced synthesis with reduced carrier. Muscle CoQ10 content in statin users has not consistently shown depletion, which weakens the deficiency premise before any clinical trial is run.
Its job is shuttling electrons inside mitochondria
Inside mitochondria, CoQ10 is the ferry that carries electrons from the first two protein complexes to the third. Without it, energy production stops.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Coenzyme Q10 accepts electrons from complexes I and II and delivers them to complex III at the Qo site of the cytochrome bc1 complex, cycling between ubiquinone, semiquinone and ubiquinol. Loss-of-function mutations in the biosynthetic enzyme COQ2 cause primary coenzyme Q10 deficiency, a rare disease in which supplementation is genuinely therapeutic — and the only setting where a deficiency argument is established.
Statins reduce its synthesis, through the shared mevalonate pathway
The pathway statins block to lower cholesterol is the same one that builds CoQ10's tail. That shared step is the entire rationale for taking CoQ10 with a statin.
──Measured in people. Written by a person from the study named beside the step. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The measurement behind this step
HMG-CoA reductase inhibition lowers mevalonate, the precursor of both cholesterol and the polyprenyl tail of CoQ10. The reasoning is sound as far as it goes. It stops at the outcome: in patients whose statin myalgia was confirmed by blinded rechallenge, quadrupling serum CoQ10 changed neither pain severity, nor pain interference, nor strength, nor VO2max.
In heart failure on standard therapy, a two-year trial halved major cardiac events. In early Parkinson disease, a Phase 3 trial was stopped for futility with both doses trending worse.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Q-SYMBIO: composite major adverse cardiovascular events 15% versus 26%, hazard ratio 0.50 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.80, P = 0.003); all-cause mortality 10% versus 18% (P = 0.018). QE3: adjusted UPDRS worsening 6.9 points on placebo, 7.5 on 1,200 mg/day and 8.0 on 2,400 mg/day, terminated at a prespecified futility criterion.
No suggested links are held for this record, so nothing is hidden from this path.
What we know
The record describes 5 steps from taking it to an effect in a person.
How we know it
Each step names the study behind it in the technical detail beside it.
What this does not prove
A change inside the body is a reason to look. It is not a result in a person.
Why it matters
A reader can see exactly where the chain stops being measured in people.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim binds any of these steps to a named population.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Felt, measured, or meaningful
Three different things that get called the same word. Registered studies measured all three, and mixing them is how a blood test becomes a health claim.
Felt
Things a person could notice without a test.
reported quality of life
health related quality of life
Measured
Things only a test, a scale or a device shows.
insulin/glucose after overnight fast
insuline/glucose after an oralglucose tolerance test
antioxidant and inflammation
phosphocreatine recovery
nt pro brain natriuretic peptide serum levels
sperm concentration in semen
seminal plasma tac
seminal plasma cat
seminal plasma sod
c reactive protein
Meaningful
Things that change how a life goes, not only a number.
als functional rating scale revised
A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. A number moving is not the same as a life going better. The two are shown apart here.
Felt, but not shown to help. A person notices a change. No study showed it leads anywhere good.
Measured, but not felt. A number moves. The person notices nothing. Both can be true.
Measured, but not shown to matter. A number moves in the good direction. Nobody showed that lives went better.
Matters, but takes years. The result that counts may take longer than anyone would keep watching.
Names that fit none of the three (27)
one year change in pulmonary function
adverse events
metabolic syndrome
general cardiovascular risk profile framingham heart study
pregnancy rate
cardiovascular risk
ovulating
antioxidant capacity
oxidative stress markers
improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction
cmax
treatment response
soluble interacellular adhesion molecule level
areal bmd of the knee region
malondialdehyde
attention
working memory performance
work efficiency
semen volume
sperm motility in semen
These are harms, study-process measures, or names the rules did not recognise. They are shown rather than dropped.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How long anything takes
Nine different lengths of time that get confused with each other. None of them is worked out from another.
Before anything is noticed.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
Before a test result moves.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
Before performance moves.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
How long the result was watched.No finished study window is recorded for a study that tested this substance.
How long people took it.How long people actually took it is not stored. The study window is not the same thing.
How long people were followed.Follow-up length is not stored separately. It is never read off the study window, which would be a different thing.
How fast the body clears it. 33.19 +/- 5.32 hours hours
Read from the label, which states: “the mean plasma CoQ10 level attained a peak of 1.004 +/- 0.370 micrograms/ml at 6.5 +/- 1.5 h after administration, and the terminal elimination half-life was 33.19 +/- 5.32 h.”
How long effects linger.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
Beyond the studies. Nothing is recorded about the long term.
The longest finished study sets the edge of what anyone measured.
A study window is not how long people took it, and neither is how long they were followed. Where RNAWiki holds only one of the three, it shows one.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Were people like you studied?
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it, and where the result stops carrying.
Who was studied
People similar to this profile were included.
People taking statins, people with heart failure, older adults buying it for energy, and a small number of patients with genuine primary CoQ10 deficiency for whom it is a real treatment.
Who is missing from the studies
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
Where the result stopped carrying
CoQ10 for statin-associated muscle symptoms, the reason most of it is bought, in its most rigorous direct test
CoQ10 as a neuroprotective agent in Parkinson disease, terminated at a prespecified futility criterion
This is a scope explorer, not a diagnosis engine.
It shows who was studied so you can see whether people similar to you were included.
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Why it might seem to do nothing
A real effect and a noticed effect are different things. These are the recorded reasons the two come apart.
It was studied for a different goal
The studies measured something else entirely.
On this record: Some registered studies measured things that match no goal on this page.
It was studied in different people
The people in the studies were not much like the reader.
On this record: Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
The evidence may simply be wrong
Small early studies often do not hold up.
On this record: RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
The product may not be what it says
Contents of a sold product are not always what the label states.
On this record: This is sold as a supplement, so no agency checked what is in a given tub before it was sold.
Other reasons RNAWiki checked and found nothing for (9)
A different form was studied
The studied form is not the form on the shelf. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
There was nothing to correct
Where a level is already normal, topping it up may change nothing. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else had to happen too
In the studies it was paired with training, a diet or another treatment. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The change is too small to feel
A real change can still sit below what a person notices. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Day-to-day swing hides it
Sleep, food, stress and time of day move most numbers more than this would. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Not enough time yet
The studies ran longer than the person has waited. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
It was not taken as studied
Missed days change the result, and studies count them. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else changed at the same time
Two changes at once cannot be told apart afterwards. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
No recorded reason
RNAWiki has nothing stored that would explain it. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
None of these is a reason to take more. Taking more is not a step this page ever suggests.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What taking it involves
The recorded facts about getting hold of it and using it. Nothing here is a suggestion about what you should do.
How it is supplied
Varies by country
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Read from the recorded approval status.
No source is stored against this line.
Form and route
Oral capsule or softgel, as ubiquinone or ubiquinol, usually in an oil base
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form and route recorded on this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
Who oversees it
Not usually supervised: sold as a supplement or food ingredient where recorded. That is a legal category, not a safety judgement.
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
The identity record classes it as a supplement ingredient; no medicines register records an approval.
No source is stored against this line.
What is in the pack
Sold in the United States as a dietary supplement under DSHEA, so no agency reviewed efficacy, safety or content before sale. Absorption is poor, lipid-dependent and highly variable, so formulation influences exposure more than label dose does, and any bioavailability claim should be judged on measured serum concentrations. Ubiquinol oxidises to ubiquinone in air, so a product's stated redox state is not verifiable at the point of use. Synthetic material can contain the non-natural cis isomer, which fermentation-derived material does not. Doses across the trial literature span more than an order of magnitude, from 300 mg per day in Q-SYMBIO to 2,400 mg per day in QE3.
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
Recorded notes on how this is sold and what that means for what is in the pack.
No source is stored against this line.
Where it is registered
Regulatory records are listed in the technical disclosure at the foot of this page.
# Counted from records
Where this came from
A count of rows RNAWiki holds. It describes our records, not your body.
Register entries are stored per jurisdiction and shown with their dates.
No source is stored against this line.
Why people stop
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
No record of why people stopped taking it is stored for this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What can go wrong
Sorted by where each line came from. A regulator's label and a report somebody sent in are not the same kind of fact.
·Worth asking a clinician aboutWritten into the record from the studies named on this page
Well tolerated across the trial literature, including at 2,400 mg per day for years in the Parkinson trial, where treatments were described as well tolerated with no safety concerns. Mild gastrointestinal upset and insomnia are the commonest complaints. CoQ10 is structurally related to vitamin K and can reduce the anticoagulant effect of warfarin, which is a genuine and clinically relevant interaction. In the statin myalgia trial, marginally more subjects reported muscle pain on CoQ10 than on placebo, which is a small and unexplained signal rather than an established harm.
Nobody counted how many people took this and were fine, so this cannot be turned into a rate.
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction.
Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing.
The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete.
News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report.
A count is not a rate and not a risk.
Ubidecarenone appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 95 reaction mentions were counted. One report can name several reactions.
open-targets-adr · recorded 2026-06-24 · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Over a long time. No completed tested study window is recorded, so long-term effects are not established by the registry record.
Groups the studies covered thinly. Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Does the exact form matter?
Evidence belongs to the exact thing that was tested. A different salt, a different mixture or a different preparation is a different question.
The form that was studied
Oral capsule or softgel, as ubiquinone or ubiquinol, usually in an oil base
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form used in the studies cited on this page.
No source is stored against this line.
What is sold
Absorption is poor, lipid-dependent and highly variable, so formulation influences exposure more than label dose does, and any bioavailability claim should be judged on measured serum concentrations. Ubiquinol oxidises to ubiquinone in air, so a product's stated redox state is not verifiable at the point of use. Synthetic material can contain the non-natural cis isomer, which fermentation-derived material does not. Doses across the trial literature span more than an order of magnitude, from 300 mg per day in Q-SYMBIO to 2,400 mg per day in QE3.
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
Recorded notes on which forms are sold and how they compare.
No source is stored against this line.
What is recorded as being sold
4013 marketed supplement labels list this ingredient, classed as non-nutrient/non-botanical and other combinations.
Those labels carry all other, nutrient and structure/function claims. A claim of that kind is written by the manufacturer and is not assessed by any regulator, so its presence says nothing about whether it is true.
Evidence carries across two names for one substance. It does not carry across a salt, a mirror form or a mixture.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What you could measure
Watching one thing carefully can tell you whether it moved. It cannot tell you what moved it.
This is sold without a prescription, so a person can sensibly watch one thing and see whether it moves.
Pick one goal. One goal only. Two at once cannot be told apart afterwards.
Pick one thing to watch. Registered studies measured things like: insulin/glucose after overnight fast; insuline/glucose after an oralglucose tolerance test; antioxidant and inflammation.
Measure before you start. Take the same measurement several times first. One reading is not a starting point.
Know the swing. Write down how much it moves on its own across a normal week.
Change one thing. Change nothing else at the same time, including training and sleep.
Give it the study length. No finished study window is recorded, so no length is suggested here.
Track whether you took it. Missed days are the most common reason a home test shows nothing.
Read the trend. Look at the line across weeks. A single reading tells you almost nothing.
What not to measure
Anything that swings more day to day than the change you are looking for.
A wearable estimate of sleep stages, which is an estimate and not a measurement.
Weight on one morning, which mostly records water.
A feeling you did not write down before starting, such as: reported quality of life.
When to stop
Stop if something new and unpleasant starts, and ask a pharmacist or doctor.
Stop if you cannot keep everything else steady, because the result will not mean anything.
Stop at the end of the window you set, and read the trend then.
Tracking can show whether something changed for you. It cannot show what caused it.
RNAWiki does not work out an amount for anyone.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Claims that go past the evidence
Things said about this substance that sound reasonable, and the exact step that is missing between the evidence and the claim.
✗Goes past the evidence
That because statins lower circulating CoQ10, replacing it relieves statin muscle symptoms
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That ubiquinol is a clinically superior form, when the trial using 600 mg of ubiquinol found nothing
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That the heart failure result generalises to healthy people buying it for energy
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That the Swedish combination trial demonstrates anything about CoQ10 alone, or outside a low-selenium population
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What nobody knows yet
Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.
Missing populations
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing long-term data
No completed tested study window is recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
No reviewed conclusion
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing interaction studies
No interaction was found in the registers checked. Not finding one is not the same as showing there is none.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Formulation uncertainty
Several salts, forms or products of Ubidecarenone are recorded. Results from one form may not transfer to another.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Mechanism not reviewed
No reviewed mechanism story exists for this substance.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Check any of this yourself
Every line above traced back to the study it came from. This is the technical layer, and the vocabulary changes here.
Every line above can be traced to the study named beside it. Follow the link and read it.
Q-SYMBIO: major cardiovascular events halved in 420 heart failure patients
In plain words
In a two-year randomised trial in people with moderate to severe heart failure, adding CoQ10 to standard treatment halved the rate of serious cardiovascular events and reduced deaths.
What was measured
Composite major adverse cardiovascular events at 2 years, cardiovascular mortality and all-cause mortality
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Q-SYMBIO randomised 420 patients with moderate to severe chronic heart failure to CoQ10 100 mg three times daily or placebo, in addition to standard therapy, over two years. The primary long-term endpoint, a composite of major adverse cardiovascular events analysed by time to first event, was reached by 15% of the CoQ10 group against 26% of placebo — hazard ratio 0.50 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.80, P = 0.003) by intention to treat. Secondary endpoints significantly lower on CoQ10 included cardiovascular mortality (9% versus 16%, P = 0.026) and all-cause mortality (10% versus 18%, P = 0.018). This is a genuinely positive randomised mortality result for a supplement and this page records it without hedging. Two features complicate it. The primary short-term endpoints at 16 weeks — change in NYHA functional class, six-minute walk distance and NT-proBNP — showed no significant changes at all, which is an odd shape for an effect that later halves mortality. And 420 patients is a small trial for a hard endpoint, and the result has not been reproduced in an independent trial of comparable size.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The statin muscle pain claim failed its direct randomised test
In plain words
CoQ10 is bought mainly for statin muscle aches. In patients whose statin muscle pain was confirmed by rechallenge, CoQ10 did not reduce pain — and slightly more people on it reported pain than on placebo.
What was measured
Brief Pain Inventory severity and interference, muscle strength, and maximal oxygen uptake with confirmed statin myalgia
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
This entry records a failure.
From the source
Taylor and colleagues first confirmed statin myalgia in 120 patients with prior symptoms using an eight-week randomised double-blind crossover of simvastatin 20 mg daily against placebo. Forty-one subjects who developed muscle pain on simvastatin but not on placebo were then randomised to simvastatin plus CoQ10 600 mg per day as ubiquinol, or simvastatin plus placebo, for eight weeks. Serum CoQ10 rose from 1.3 +/- 0.4 to 5.2 +/- 2.3 micrograms per millilitre on supplementation and fell on placebo (1.3 +/- 0.3 to 0.8 +/- 0.2), P < 0.05 — so the intervention unambiguously delivered. Brief Pain Inventory severity and interference scores both increased with simvastatin (both P < 0.01) irrespective of CoQ10 assignment (P = 0.53 and 0.56). There were no changes in muscle strength or maximal oxygen uptake with or without CoQ10, all P > 0.10. Marginally more subjects reported pain on CoQ10 than on placebo: 14 of 20 against 7 of 18, P = 0.05. The rechallenge design is what makes this trial matter — it excluded the majority of people with self-reported statin myalgia who do not reproduce it under blinding, and tested CoQ10 in the population where the claim should have been strongest.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
QE3: Phase 3 in Parkinson disease, terminated for futility, both arms worse
In plain words
A 600-patient Phase 3 trial of high-dose CoQ10 in early Parkinson disease was stopped early for futility. Both dose groups declined slightly faster than placebo.
What was measured
Adjusted mean change in total Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale score from baseline to final visit
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
This entry records a failure.
From the source
The Parkinson Study Group QE3 trial randomised 600 participants with Parkinson disease diagnosed within five years, at 67 North American sites, to placebo, 1,200 mg/day or 2,400 mg/day of CoQ10. Mean age was 62.5 years and mean baseline total UPDRS score 22.7. The study was terminated after a prespecified futility criterion was reached. At termination both active treatment groups showed slight adverse trends relative to placebo: adjusted mean worsening in total UPDRS from baseline to final visit was 6.9 points on placebo, 7.5 points on 1,200 mg/day (P = .49 versus placebo) and 8.0 points on 2,400 mg/day (P = .21). Treatments were well tolerated with no safety concerns, and the authors concluded there was no evidence of clinical benefit. The trial was built on preclinical models showing reduced dopamine neuron loss and on a Phase II study suggesting possible benefit — the standard sequence in which a promising small signal does not survive an adequately powered test. Note the dose: 2,400 mg per day is twenty-four times the amount per dose used in Q-SYMBIO.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The mechanism for statin myalgia is sound, and the outcome still did not follow
In plain words
Statins block the pathway that makes CoQ10, and blood CoQ10 really does fall on statins. The step from that to muscle pain, and from replacement to relief, is where the reasoning breaks.
What was measured
That because statins lower circulating CoQ10, replacing CoQ10 will relieve statin-associated muscle symptoms
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
HMG-CoA reductase inhibition reduces mevalonate, the precursor both of cholesterol and of the polyprenyl tail of coenzyme Q10, so statins lower circulating CoQ10. That much is uncontested. Two problems separate it from the clinical claim. First, plasma CoQ10 is transported almost entirely on LDL, so a fall in plasma CoQ10 on a statin is partly a fall in its carrier rather than a fall in tissue status, and studies of muscle CoQ10 in statin users have not consistently shown depletion. Second, and decisively, the causal chain was tested directly: raising serum CoQ10 fourfold in patients with rechallenge-confirmed statin myalgia produced no improvement in pain, strength or aerobic capacity. A meta-analysis of randomised trials of CoQ10 for statin-induced myopathy likewise found no significant effect on creatine kinase. This is one of the clearest examples in the file of a mechanistically compelling story that does not survive its own outcome trial.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
A five-year Swedish trial found lower cardiovascular mortality — with selenium
In plain words
A five-year randomised trial in elderly Swedes found reduced cardiovascular deaths on a combination of CoQ10 and selenium, in a population with low selenium intake.
What was measured
Cardiovascular mortality and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide over five years
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Alehagen and colleagues randomised elderly Swedish citizens to combined selenium and coenzyme Q10 supplementation or placebo for five years, reporting reduced cardiovascular mortality and reduced N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide. Two contextual facts are essential and are usually dropped when the trial is cited. The intervention was a combination, so no effect can be attributed to CoQ10 alone. And Sweden has among the lowest soil and dietary selenium in Europe, meaning the population was plausibly selenium-insufficient at baseline — which makes this a repletion study in a deficient population rather than a supplementation study in a replete one. Read alongside the selenium record on this site, where 200 micrograms daily in a selenium-replete American population produced no cancer prevention and increased diabetes incidence, the contrast is the point: the same nutrient helps where there is a deficit and does not, or harms, where there is not.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Ubiquinol versus ubiquinone is a redox state, not a product class
In plain words
The premium "ubiquinol" form is the same molecule carrying two extra hydrogens. It oxidises in air, and the body interconverts the two forms continuously anyway.
What was measured
That ubiquinol is a superior product whose better absorption unlocks clinical effects ubiquinone cannot deliver
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Ubiquinone (C59H90O4, 863.3 g/mol) and ubiquinol (C59H92O4, 865.4 g/mol) differ by a two-electron, two-proton reduction. The body interconverts them continuously — that interconversion is precisely what coenzyme Q10 does in the respiratory chain — and ingested ubiquinone is reduced to ubiquinol during absorption. Ubiquinol is also chemically unstable in air, so a product's redox state at manufacture is not necessarily its redox state at ingestion, and this is not verified on any label. The strongest available counter-evidence to the premium claim is the statin myalgia trial, which used 600 mg per day of ubiquinol specifically, achieved a fourfold rise in serum CoQ10, and produced no clinical benefit whatsoever. Whatever limits CoQ10's efficacy in that setting, it was not the redox state or the achieved blood level.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
4 questions this page could not answer
These sections were prepared and left out because there was nothing to put in them. They are listed rather than hidden, so the gaps in this record are visible.
What it may clash with — found nothing in the sources checked.
Other ways to the same goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
How this medicine reached us — found nothing in the sources checked.
What changed on this page — found nothing in the sources checked.
The record as stored
The full record, for auditing
Everything above is built from what is below. This layer keeps the technical vocabulary, record identifiers and every stored row, so a reader who wants to check the page can.
The older medicine-wide conclusion held in this record
Written for a clinical reader, and about the medicine as a whole rather than about one indication, population and set of trials. RNAWiki does not treat it as a programme conclusion and no reviewer has signed it off in that form. It is here word for word because it is what the record holds.
Q-SYMBIO randomised 420 heart failure patients and found major adverse cardiovascular events in 15% on CoQ10 against 26% on placebo with all-cause mortality 10% against 18% — a genuinely positive result — while the Phase 3 Parkinson trial was stopped for futility with both dose arms trending worse than placebo, and the statin myalgia trial found marginally more people reporting pain on CoQ10 than on placebo.
Recorded evidence blocks (12)
Q1
What did Ubidecarenone's largest trial (609 people) and its longest (11 years) measure?
609 people in Ubidecarenone's largest registered study, 11 years in its longest registered window, measuring Oxidative protein concentration at 6 month. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
45 na, 37 phase2, 17 phase3, 10 phase1, 10 phase4, 5 early phase1, 1 na or unstated; NCT00976131; 2021-01-20. Last human test completed 2026, NCT07771153.
Interpretation These counts include studies where Ubidecarenone was a comparison treatment, a background treatment or an exposure in an observational study, and the longest window may be a planned end date. Trial roles have not yet been classified for this record.
Show the evidence
na
45
phase2
37
phase3
17
phase1
10
phase4
10
early phase1
5
2 more recorded rows
na or unstated
1
Last recorded human testNCT07771153
2026-06-30
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q2
Ubidecarenone was tested only in human — what did it show?
futility/efficacy (1), accrual/recruitment (6), sponsor decision unspecified (1) and other (2): Ubidecarenone's stop wording, clustered. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
"New enrollment has been suspended, currently following previously enrolled participants"; 10 of 112 registered studies
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00308113
terminated; "New enrollment has been suspended, currently following previously enrolled participants"
NCT00590408
terminated; "Lack of recruitment"
NCT00608881
terminated; "Futility analysis failed to showed likelihoo of benefit of CoQ 2400 mg/day."
NCT00878124
terminated; "Very low recruitment rate"
NCT02486796
terminated; "Operational barriers prevent critical specimen analyses from being performed."
NCT03104998
withdrawn; "No further patient enrollment"
4 further recorded trials
NCT03113994
terminated; "COVID-19 Pandemic"
NCT03831425
withdrawn; "unable to recruit despite multiple rounds of recruitment due to (1) not meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria (2) unwilling to participate during pandemic (3) living outside Toronto (4) involved in other PWS studies (5) no response to our…"
NCT03968640
withdrawn; "Sponsor terminated award"
NCT05945160
withdrawn; "Funding was terminated, the study will not enroll any subjects"
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q4
Human studies of Ubidecarenone used Coenzyme Q10 100 MG Oral Capsule — over how long?
3 recorded entries; human; also "Ubiquinone 200 Mg Oral Capsule", "Coenzyme Q10 (Ubiquinol) -200mg ®"
Show the evidence
human
NCT05731596
Coenzyme Q10 100 MG Oral Capsule
NCT06555575
Ubiquinone 200 Mg Oral Capsule
NCT06570811
Coenzyme Q10 (Ubiquinol) -200mg ®
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q5
Ubidecarenone's half-life is 33.19 +/- 5.32 hours — which schedules were studied?
33.19 +/- 5.32 hours, the half-life Ubidecarenone's label states. openfda-label · 2026-08-27
Show the evidence
half life
33.19 +/- 5.32 hours hours; the mean plasma CoQ10 level attained a peak of 1.004 +/- 0.370 micrograms/ml at 6.5 +/- 1.5 h after administration, and the terminal elimination half-life was 33.19 +/- 5.32 h.
recorded 2026-08-27 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q6
Could one person measure Ubidecarenone's effect on als functional rating scale revised?
Als functional rating scale revised: measured in Ubidecarenone's trials.
Interpretation als functional rating scale revised is the recorded endpoint.
Show the evidence
biomarkers
als functional rating scale revised; 2026-09-01
one year change in pulmonary function; 2026-09-01
adverse events; 2026-09-01
metabolic syndrome; 2026-09-01
general cardiovascular risk profile framingham heart study; 2026-09-01
pregnancy rate; 2026-09-01
14 more recorded rows
biomarkers
insulin/glucose after overnight fast; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
insuline/glucose after an oralglucose tolerance test; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
cardiovascular risk; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
antioxidant and inflammation; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
phosphocreatine recovery; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
ovulating; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
antioxidant capacity; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
oxidative stress markers; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
cmax; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
reported quality of life; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
treatment response; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
nt pro brain natriuretic peptide serum levels; 2026-09-01
0; NCT00327756; PHASE2; the smallest recorded human enrolment at or below 30; the registry states no direction of its result; WITHDRAWN
Q7
Which of adverse events, als functional rating scale revised and antioxidant and inflammation did Ubidecarenone's trials measure?
adverse events, als functional rating scale revised and antioxidant and inflammation lead 40 outcome terms across Ubidecarenone's trials. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
Interpretation metabolic syndrome, general cardiovascular risk profile framingham heart study, pregnancy rate, insulin/glucose after overnight fast, insuline/glucose after an oralglucose tolerance test and cardiovascular risk follow.
Show the evidence
als functional rating scale revised
1
one year change in pulmonary function
1
adverse events
1
metabolic syndrome
1
general cardiovascular risk profile framingham heart study
1
pregnancy rate
1
14 more recorded rows
insulin/glucose after overnight fast
1
insuline/glucose after an oralglucose tolerance test
1
cardiovascular risk
1
antioxidant and inflammation
1
phosphocreatine recovery
1
ovulating
1
antioxidant capacity
1
oxidative stress markers
1
improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction
1
cmax
1
reported quality of life
1
treatment response
1
nt pro brain natriuretic peptide serum levels
1
soluble interacellular adhesion molecule level
1
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q8
Which of Ubidecarenone's 18 ongoing trials reports first?
C-reactive protein; Number of patients who complete the study after randomized assignment; latest 2030-12-15
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT04444349
"Protective Effect of CoQ10 Against Negative Inflammatory Response and Organ Dysfunction in Cardiovascular Surgery (PANDA V)"; n 500; "C-reactive protein"; 2025-12-31
NCT04972552
"Watermelon/UBIQuinone Study"; n 70; "Number of patients who complete the study after randomized assignment"; 2026-06-30
NCT05422534
"CoQ10 and Exercise for Mitochondrial Dysfunction in Advance Kidney Disease"; n 156; "PCr recovery measured by 31 phosphorus magnetic resonance spectroscopy"; 2027-10-01
NCT05873673
"Coenzyme Q10 and Dentoalveolar Cyst"; n 20; "bone density"; 2025-04-01
NCT06419335
"Reducing Fatigue With CoQ10 Supplementation in Patients With Crohn's Disease Study"; n 60; "Assess improved fatigue among patients with Crohn's Disease"; 2026-09-01
NCT06555575
"Ubiquinone vs. Ubiquinol Supplementation"; n 90; "Fertilized oocyte percentage"; 2027-01
12 further recorded trials
NCT06743802
"The Effect of Coenzyme Q10 in Preventing Pain After Thoracoscopic Surgery"; n 264; "The incidence of chronic postsurgical pain"; 2026-03-20
NCT06856447
"The Role of Coenzyme Q10 in the Prophylaxis of Oxaliplatin Induced Peripheral Neuropathy in Patients With Colorectal Cancer"; n 22; "Tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α)"; 2026-01-10
NCT06962657
"Mitigating Toxic Impact: The Role of Coenzyme Q10 in Post-Exposure Protection"; n 20; "CoQ10 vs. placebo will (trend or effect) improve UCSD-20 (summed symptom score)"; 2028-10-01
NCT07045246
"Effect of Co-enzyme Q10 on the Bone Volume of Alveolar Cleft Reconstruction"; n 12; "bone volume"; 2026-04-01
NCT07252518
"Effect of Pentoxifylline + CoQ10 vs CoQ10 Alone on Sperm Motility in Subfertile Men With Asthenozoospermia"; n 56; "Progressive sperm motility"; 2027-03-01
NCT07260773
"The Effects of Coenzyme Q10 Pretreatment on Ovarian Function and Assisted Reproductive Outcomes in Patients With Ovarian Hyporesponsiveness."; n 128; "Number of oocytes retrieved"; 2027-03
NCT07331935
"Efficacy of Topical Coenzyme Q10 and Curcumin for Oral Leukoplakia Treatment"; n 34; "Change in lesion size"; 2026-03-30
NCT07476443
"Renoprotective Role of Vitamin C and Coenzyme Q10 in Nephrotoxicity"; n 75; "Evaluation of the potential protective effects of Vitamin C and Coenzyme Q10 against cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity in chemotherapy-naïve cancer patients."; 2027-08-20
NCT07668284
"COQ10 and Vitamin E for Off-Target Radiation Toxicity"; n 200; "Recommended Phase 2 Dose"; 2030-12-15
NCT07677826
"Effect of Co-enzyme Q10 and Vitamin C Alone or in Combination After a Surgical Gingival Depigmentation"; n 20; "Change in gingival pigmentation intensity using the Dummett Oral Pigmentation Index (DOPI). The DOPI scale from 0 to 3, where:0 = No clinical pigmentation ,1 = Mild pigmentation , 2 = Moderate pigmentation 3 = Heavy pigmentation"; 2026-12-20
NCT07748130
"CoQ10 Effects on MDM Liver Fat Via FibroTouchI."; n 30; "Liver Fat Quantification"; 2027-12
NCT07760506
"The Effects of Quercefit® and Ubiqsome™ in Mitigating Inflammation and Promoting Metabolic Health"; n 60; "Inflammaging (CIMKDM)"; 2028-08
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q9
Which running trial of Ubidecarenone could settle inflammatory markers?
NCT04444349 measures C-reactive protein, reading out 2025-12-31.
1 open trial; n 500; "Protective Effect of CoQ10 Against Negative Inflammatory Response and Organ Dysfunction in Cardiovascular Surgery (PANDA V)"
Show the evidence
TrialNCT04444349
"Protective Effect of CoQ10 Against Negative Inflammatory Response and Organ Dysfunction in Cardiovascular Surgery (PANDA V)"; n 500; "C-reactive protein"; 2025-12-31
Q10
Which 44 trials of Ubidecarenone posted no result?
Posted no result
44 of 44 completed trials
Registrations
NCT00004731, NCT00307996, NCT00033189, NCT00076492, NCT00532571 and NCT00300937, and 38 more
Completion dates
oldest 2003-10; newest 2024-06-30
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00004731
2003-10
NCT00307996
2004-12
NCT00033189
2005-01
NCT00076492
2005-09
NCT00532571
2005-09
NCT00300937
2006-09
14 further recorded trials
NCT00328874
2007-02
NCT01163500
2009-03
NCT02012322
2009-07
NCT00957216
2009-08
NCT00718796
2009-10
NCT01087632
2010-07
NCT00908297
2010-11
NCT01026311
2011-03
NCT01011348
2011-07
NCT00716612
2012-09
NCT01892176
2012-12
NCT00541164
2013-01
NCT01910766
2013-01
NCT01424761
2013-03
Q11
At the median, Ubidecarenone's trials enrolled 48.5 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
48.5
Largest enrolment
609
Registered trials counted
110
Q12
What do 95 spontaneous reports say about Ubidecarenone — and not say?
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction. Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing. The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete. News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report. A count is not a rate and not a risk.
Ubidecarenone appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 95 reaction mentions were counted: myalgia 11; pain 11; pyrexia 11; drug interaction 10. open-targets-adr · CHEMBL454801 · 2026-06-24
Show the evidence
myalgia
11
pain
11
pyrexia
11
drug interaction
10
abdominal pain
9
anaemia
9
4 more recorded rows
constipation
9
drug-induced liver injury
9
hepatotoxicity
8
therapeutic product effect incomplete
8
recorded 2026-06-24 · last checked 2026-09-04
Where it is registeredIdentifiers, relations and other names
ChEMBL ATC CC BY-SA · ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Europe PMC — metadata only, under the recorded legal gate · Open Targets 26.06 — CC0 · derived from this page's own recorded fields; no external licence · mixed register set; per-register licences in docs/specs/corpus-20k-sources.md · openFDA / DailyMed — US Government work
✗ required summary fields resolved: 5 required field(s) not terminal: Why people use it, Best-supported result, Most important common problem, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
✓ public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
✓ source coverage passed: 7 source rows
✓ no critical contamination: no quarantine open
✓ canonical metadata passed: slug and display name present
✓ no raw internal fields: enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
This is a record of evidence. It is not medical advice, and it does not say this substance suits you. Nothing here says any substance on RNAWiki is appropriate for a child.