No plain explanation of what this changes is stored.
No recorded use is stored in reader language.
No statement of the main limit is recorded.
The four opening statements run to 26 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.
Enzyme
An enzyme is a protein that speeds up one chemical change.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
An enzyme is like a machine on a production line doing one cut.
Where that stops being true. A machine is switched on and off by a person. Enzymes are controlled by the cell.
What people get wrong. Enzymes are thought to be used up. They are not; they work again and again.
A catalytic protein that lowers the activation energy of a specific reaction.
Receptor
A receptor is a part of a cell that a signal fits into.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A receptor is like a lock waiting for one key.
Where that stops being true. A lock either opens or does not. A receptor can be half-triggered, or worn out.
What people get wrong. Fitting a receptor is read as causing a benefit. It causes a step, and nothing more.
A protein that binds a specific ligand and converts that binding into a cellular response.
Pathway
A pathway is a chain of steps inside a cell, each one setting off the next.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A pathway is like a row of dominoes.
Where that stops being true. Dominoes fall one way. Pathways loop back and can switch themselves off.
What people get wrong. Changing one step is read as changing the outcome. Other steps often absorb it.
An ordered series of molecular interactions producing a defined cellular change.
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 3 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
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.
Which registered measures put each goal on this table
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
2 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.
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.
Characterization of gut microbiota profile by 16S r RNA gene sequencing
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT06941090
How many people
10000
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
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. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route.
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Post-ERCP Pancreatitis
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT02947932
How many people
2700
Study design
Phase 4
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
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. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route.
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Changes in the composite ICH score of adolescents from baseline to year 2 and 4
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT03504059
How many people
1326
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
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. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route.
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Incidence of metachronous colorectal adenomas (tubulovillous, tubular, villous and serrated lesions) at the 3 year follow-up colonoscopy
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT01360320
How many people
1001
Study design
Phase 2
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
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. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route.
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Change in atrial fibrillation severity at one year
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT06995391
How many people
1000
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
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. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route.
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Plasma levels of LDL cholesterol
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT03620266
How many people
900
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
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. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route.
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
What we know
RNAWiki holds 6 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 dayNo evidence recorded. Walking, dressing, breathing, recovering.No registered study measures this.
□Measured performanceNo evidence recorded. How much was lifted, how far was run, how fast.No registered study measures this.
□Symptoms and quality of lifeNo evidence recorded. Pain, tiredness, mood, sleep, as the person rated it.No registered study measures this.
■A number that stands in for healthEvidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.2 registered measures of this kind.
■A step measured inside a personEvidence recorded. Something measured in human tissue or human cells.A human record sits on the stored organism ladder.
■AnimalsEvidence recorded. Mice, rats, dogs. Useful for ideas, not proof about people.Stored records in Yeast, C. elegans (roundworm), Drosophila (fruit fly), Mouse, Rat. A result in animals says what to test next. It does not say what happens in people.
■Cells in a dishEvidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.Stored mechanism abstracts describe steps measured in cells or tissue.
□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 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.
No registered study measured anything of this kind.
Measured
Things only a test, a scale or a device shows.
peripheral insulin sensitivity
insulin resistance
Meaningful
Things that change how a life goes, not only a number.
No registered study measured anything of this kind.
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 (1)
circulating bile acids
These are harms, study-process measures, or names the rules did not recognise. They are shown rather than dropped.
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
No description of who was studied is recorded.
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
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.
Other reasons RNAWiki checked and found nothing for (10)
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.
The product may not be what it says
Contents of a sold product are not always what the label states. 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
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
No form or route is recorded.
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
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
Nothing is recorded about product quality.
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∅Nothing found in the sources checked
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.
∅Nothing found in the sources checked
No harm is recorded against this substance in the sources RNAWiki checked. Finding nothing is not the same as showing there is nothing.
The sources listed were searched and held nothing. That is not the same as nothing existing.
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
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
The exact form studied is not recorded.
No source is stored against this line.
What is sold
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
Nothing further is recorded about which forms are sold.
No source is stored against this line.
What is recorded as being sold
2309 marketed supplement labels list this ingredient, classed as botanical with nutrients 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.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
7 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.
The path through the body — found nothing in the sources checked.
How long anything takes — found nothing in the sources checked.
What it may clash with — found nothing in the sources checked.
Other ways to the same goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
Claims that go past the evidence — 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.
Recorded evidence blocks (9)
Q1
What did Polyphenol's largest trial (90 people) and its longest (3.2 years) measure?
90 people in Polyphenol's largest registered study, 3.2 years in its longest registered window, measuring Difference between treatment and placebo in changes from baseline of ambulatory systolic and diastolic blood pressure. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
7 na; NCT01478841; 2012-01; no ageing endpoint recorded. Last human test completed 2019, NCT03482401.
Interpretation These counts include studies where Polyphenol 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
7
Last recorded human testNCT03482401
2019-12-31
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q2
From yeast to human: where has Polyphenol shown lifespan?
C. elegans: lifespan, Drosophila: lifespan, yeast: mechanism-only, mouse: mechanism-only, rat: mechanism-only and human: mechanism-only (7): the rungs where Polyphenol has a recorded finding. Europe PMC and ClinicalTrials.gov · organism ladder · 2026-09-01
Interpretation Difference between treatment and placebo in changes from baseline of ambulatory systolic and diastolic blood pressure — the recorded outcome words.
Show the evidence
C. elegans
lifespan
Drosophila
lifespan
yeast
mechanism-only
mouse
mechanism-only
rat
mechanism-only
humanNCT00869193
mechanism-only; Difference between treatment and placebo in changes from baseline of ambulatory systolic and diastolic blood pressure; 7
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q3
More Polyphenol was worse in human: at what point?
Hormetic in human: "The higher efficacy of the 1% PSPLE indicates a hormetic response, where low polyphenol exposure triggers adaptive mitochondrial and metabolic activation, on the contrary, higher doses offer no further benefits." Europe PMC · dose-response search · 2026-08-11
2 recorded sentences naming Polyphenol; hormetic, biphasic
Show the evidence
hormeticPMID 42226237
"The higher efficacy of the 1% PSPLE indicates a hormetic response, where low polyphenol exposure triggers adaptive mitochondrial and metabolic activation, on the contrary, higher doses offer no further benefits."
biphasic
"Both α-KG and citric acid, tricarboxylic acid cycle intermediates, showed biphasic, dose-dependent effects on BC yield: moderate supplementation (0.25 g/L α-KG; 0.5 g/L citric acid) approximately doubled biofilm mass relative to control, while higher doses markedly suppressed or abolished BC growth, with α-KG showing stronger inhibition at high concentration than citric acid. α-KG supplementation…"
recorded 2026-08-11 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q4
Could one person measure Polyphenol's effect on peripheral insulin sensitivity?
Peripheral insulin sensitivity: measured in Polyphenol's trials.
Interpretation peripheral insulin sensitivity is the recorded endpoint.
Show the evidence
biomarkers
peripheral insulin sensitivity; 2026-09-01
insulin resistance; 2026-09-01
circulating bile acids; 2026-09-01
Not recorded for this substance
a recorded half-life; a small human trial reporting an effect
Q5
Which of circulating bile acids, insulin resistance and peripheral insulin sensitivity did Polyphenol's trials measure?
circulating bile acids, insulin resistance and peripheral insulin sensitivity lead 3 outcome terms across Polyphenol's trials. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
3 terms in all.
Show the evidence
peripheral insulin sensitivity
1
insulin resistance
1
circulating bile acids
1
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q6
Which 5 trials of Polyphenol posted no result?
Posted no result
5 of 5 completed trials
Registrations
NCT00869193, NCT01478841, NCT02006394, NCT02116816 and NCT03482401
Completion dates
oldest 2009-07; newest 2019-12-31
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00869193
2009-07
NCT01478841
2012-01
NCT02006394
2013-11
NCT02116816
2015-05
NCT03482401
2019-12-31
Q7
At the median, Polyphenol's trials enrolled 44 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
44
Largest enrolment
90
Registered trials counted
7
Q8
Was Polyphenol studied with fasting and exercise?
fasting and exercise are named in Polyphenol's label sentences: "This multicenter, parallel-arm, superiority, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluates the efficacy of Totum-63 (T63), a polyphenol-rich blend of plant extracts, in improving fasting plasma glucose (FPG) in individuals with prediabetes or early-stage type 2 diabetes (T2D)." openfda-label+europepmc · 2026-07-20
2 recorded statements; fasting, exercise
Show the evidence
fasting
This multicenter, parallel-arm, superiority, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluates the efficacy of Totum-63 (T63), a polyphenol-rich blend of plant extracts, in improving fasting plasma glucose (FPG) in individuals with prediabetes or early-stage type 2 diabetes (T2D).
exercise
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating polyphenol supplementation versus placebo on post-exercise recovery in adult soccer players were included.
recorded 2026-07-20 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q9
What is recorded about Polyphenol and mTOR?
"We define testable predictions: (1) prolonged mTORC1 activation (>24 h post‑exercise) associates with ↓AMPK Thr172‑P, ↓NAD⁺ and ↓SIRT1 activity; (2) overreaching with high anabolic load increases PARylation and H3K9ac while reducing TET activity; (3) interventions that periodically restore AMPK (fasted endurance, time‑restricted…" — where Polyphenol and mTOR appear together. Europe PMC · pathway abstract search · 2026-04-06
"We define testable predictions: (1) prolonged mTORC1 activation (>24 h post‑exercise) associates with ↓AMPK Thr172‑P, ↓NAD⁺ and ↓SIRT1 activity; (2) overreaching with high anabolic load increases PARylation and H3K9ac while reducing TET activity; (3) interventions that periodically restore AMPK (fasted endurance, time‑restricted feeding, polyphenol‑mediated AMPK activation) re‑establish…"
AMPK
"We define testable predictions: (1) prolonged mTORC1 activation (>24 h post‑exercise) associates with ↓AMPK Thr172‑P, ↓NAD⁺ and ↓SIRT1 activity; (2) overreaching with high anabolic load increases PARylation and H3K9ac while reducing TET activity; (3) interventions that periodically restore AMPK (fasted endurance, time‑restricted feeding, polyphenol‑mediated AMPK activation) re‑establish…"
sirtuin
"We define testable predictions: (1) prolonged mTORC1 activation (>24 h post‑exercise) associates with ↓AMPK Thr172‑P, ↓NAD⁺ and ↓SIRT1 activity; (2) overreaching with high anabolic load increases PARylation and H3K9ac while reducing TET activity; (3) interventions that periodically restore AMPK (fasted endurance, time‑restricted feeding, polyphenol‑mediated AMPK activation) re‑establish…"
NAD+
"We define testable predictions: (1) prolonged mTORC1 activation (>24 h post‑exercise) associates with ↓AMPK Thr172‑P, ↓NAD⁺ and ↓SIRT1 activity; (2) overreaching with high anabolic load increases PARylation and H3K9ac while reducing TET activity; (3) interventions that periodically restore AMPK (fasted endurance, time‑restricted feeding, polyphenol‑mediated AMPK activation) re‑establish…"
autophagyPMID 40989799
"The review highlights the potential of polyphenol-exercise synergy in modulating autophagy, which may result in innovative therapeutic approaches for cancer treatment and metabolic health."
NAD+PMID 41946301
"Here we describe a fully oral, multi-component formulation comprising bioavailable polyphenol derivatives (pterostilbene cocrystals and silybin-phosphatidylcholine), the NAD⁺ precursor nicotinamide riboside, and captopril, an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor with established radiomitigative activity that synergizes with the polyphenols."
2 more recorded rows
autophagyPMID 41850343
"This study demonstrates that resveratrol (Res), a natural polyphenol, counteracts this pathogenic strategy in infected human bronchial epithelial (HBE) cells by inducing autophagy-dependent apoptosis."
IGF-1PMID 40552775
"This study reveals how Firmicutes-dominant microbial imbalance drives BPH progression via IGF-1 signaling and identifies the green tea polyphenol epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG) as a dual-action therapeutic."
sirtuin
PMID 39679288
"Curcumin, a natural polyphenol, has been shown to modulate SIRT1 activity, offering therapeutic benefits."
PMID 38474770
"In this study, using an in vitro and in vivo mouse model, we demonstrated that CM1, a derivative of the natural polyphenol chrysin, exerts an anti-inflammatory effect by inducing the expression of the ubiquitin-editing protein TNFAIP3 and the NAD-dependent deacetylase sirtuin 1 (SIRT1)."
NAD+PMID 38474770
"In this study, using an in vitro and in vivo mouse model, we demonstrated that CM1, a derivative of the natural polyphenol chrysin, exerts an anti-inflammatory effect by inducing the expression of the ubiquitin-editing protein TNFAIP3 and the NAD-dependent deacetylase sirtuin 1 (SIRT1)."
AMPKPMID 41756637
"These results demonstrate that attenuation of lipid accumulation by polyphenol-rich Chinese olive extracts in HepG2 cells is accompanied by AMPK phosphorylation and miRNA modulation."
recorded 2026-04-06 · last checked 2026-09-04
Where it is registeredIdentifiers, relations and other names
Sources (8)
Sources
ClinicalTrials.govClinicalTrials.gov API v2 snapshot 2026-09-01T09:00:05 ·
ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Europe PMC — metadata only, under the recorded legal gate · 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: 3 required field(s) not terminal: Best-supported result, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
✓ public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
✓ source coverage passed: 8 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.