Its recorded molecular formula is C12H22O11, weighing 342.3.
PubChem record · 7427 · read 2026-08-29
Where each sentence above came from
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.
Protein
A protein is a folded chain your body builds to do a specific job.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A protein is like a tool bent into one shape for one task.
Where that stops being true. A tool keeps its shape. A protein can change shape and stop working.
What people get wrong. Protein in food and a protein in the body are related but not the same thing.
A polymer of amino acids folded into a defined structure that determines its function.
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 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.
Seroconversion rate of HI antibody
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT05158777
How many people
2480
Study design
Phase 3
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. Cutaneous
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Seroconversion rate of the antibody
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT05015686
How many people
2400
Study design
Phase 3
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. Cutaneous
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Disease Progression
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT04297683
How many people
1500
Study design
Phase 2/Phase 3
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. Cutaneous
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
To evaluate the Geometric mean RVNA Concentration (accessd by Rapid Fluorescent Foci Inhibition Test(RIFFIT)) for GR1801 recipients is non-inferior to the Geometric mean RVNA Concentration for HRIG recipients on Study Day 7.
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT05846568
How many people
1200
Study design
Phase 3
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. Cutaneous
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Live birth rate
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT07088640
How many people
816
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. Cutaneous
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Efficacy of tislelizumab compared to placebo as measured by DFS (Disease-free survival)
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT06332274
How many people
717
Study design
Phase 3
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
Living longer, or avoiding a major event
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. Cutaneous
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · 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.0 registered measures of this kind. 2 written-up studies measured this and did not show a benefit.
□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 healthNo evidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.No registered study measures this.
■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 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 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.
Shake well before use, take an appropriate amount of the product and apply it evenly to the facial skin. Gently massage until absorbed.
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
Prescription only
❝ 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
Cutaneous
✎ 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
RNAWiki has not recorded a supervision or regulatory status for this substance.
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
No register row and no identity class settled the question.
No source is stored against this line.
What is in the pack
Sold as liquid, given by the cutaneous route.
✎ 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∅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.
Reports sent to a regulator
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.
Trehalose appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 20 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
Cutaneous
✎ 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
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
3 products list this as an active ingredient in the United States drug directory. 2 of them contain it and nothing else.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 73212-108 · read 2026-08-29
They are sold as liquid and powder, taken cutaneous.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 73212-108 · read 2026-08-29
1 published label names it as an active ingredient. None of them describes this substance alone, so no label text on this page can be attributed to it rather than to a combination.
US prescribing information · 2ff89a13-3969-2df1-e063-6394a90ac0d3 · read 2026-08-29
Those labels are classed as human otc drug.
US prescribing information · 2ff89a13-3969-2df1-e063-6394a90ac0d3 · read 2026-08-29
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
This one is decided with a clinician, so this section holds questions to ask rather than a plan to run.
RNAWiki could not confidently classify this substance, so no self-experiment plan is offered.
Questions worth asking
Which of the trials of Trehalose studied people like me?
What was measured, and for how long?
Was the result a laboratory value or a health outcome?
What would we watch for, and when would we stop?
Tracking can show whether something changed for you. It cannot show what caused it.
RNAWiki records evidence. It does not say whether this substance is right for you.
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.
How fast does the body clear it?
The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.
Why it matters. Without this, nothing on this page can say how long anything lasts.
What would answer it
A stored source that records 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 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 Trehalose 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.
Where else this substance is registered
FDA substance identifier (UNII)
B8WCK70T7I
CAS registry number
99-20-7
PubChem compound
7427
ChEBI
16551
RxNorm concept
1311373
EMA substance identifier
100000078317
European Chemicals Agency number
202-739-6
DrugBank
DB12310
Checks this page had to pass
✓ Passed
Identity resolved
no open identity hold
✓ Passed
No unresolved merge across substance families
no quarantine open
✗ Not passed
Every public sentence names a source
The opening statement carries no source: the record holds neither an explanation nor a recorded use.
✗ Not passed
Trial roles classified for highlighted evidence
No registered study is classified as testing this substance.
✓ Passed
No internal keys in reader text
enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
✗ Not passed
Safety mode resolved
No register row and no identity class settled the question.
✓ Passed
Canonical metadata present
slug and display name present
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How this medicine reached us
Kept near the foot of the page. A historical event moves up only when it changes something about this substance today.
What the approval register records
The earliest marketing start date recorded for a listed product is 20200220.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 73212-108 · read 2026-08-29
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What to learn next
Ordered by what would most change how you read this page, starting with what is easiest to misunderstand.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
8 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 was measured, goal by goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
The path through the body — found nothing in the sources checked.
Felt, measured, or meaningful — 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.
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 (12)
Q1
What did Trehalose's largest trial (68 people) and its longest (7 years) measure?
68 people in Trehalose's largest registered study, 7 years in its longest registered window, measuring Primary Outcome: efficacy assessed with the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
3 na, 3 phase2, 2 phase1, 2 phase4, 1 early phase1, 1 na or unstated, 1 phase3; NCT05593549; 2029-12-31. Last human test completed 2022, NCT02800161.
Interpretation These counts include studies where Trehalose 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
3
phase2
3
phase1
2
phase4
2
early phase1
1
na or unstated
1
2 more recorded rows
phase3
1
Last recorded human testNCT02800161
2022-10
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q2
From C. elegans to human: where has Trehalose shown lifespan?
Hormetic in human: "While no clear hormetic effects were observed in terms of improved performance, the elevated trehalose levels in bees constantly exposed to 1% ethanol may indicate adaptations protecting bees from ethanol-induced damage." Europe PMC · dose-response search · 2026-05-12
5 recorded sentences naming Trehalose; hormetic, biphasic, dose-response
Show the evidence
hormetic
"While no clear hormetic effects were observed in terms of improved performance, the elevated trehalose levels in bees constantly exposed to 1% ethanol may indicate adaptations protecting bees from ethanol-induced damage."
"While no clear hormetic effects were observed in terms of improved performance, the elevated trehalose levels in bees constantly exposed to 1% ethanol may indicate adaptations protecting from ethanol-induced damage."
biphasic
PMID 41898963
"Spatiotemporal analysis revealed that most chitin- and trehalose-related genes generally exhibited a biphasic "suppression-compensation" trend (initial downregulation followed by upregulation)."
"We hypothesize that salinity transiently uncouples the sucrose–trehalose-6-P (Tre6P)– Sucrose non-fermenting kinase 1 (SnRK1) nexus, aligning with a biphasic root metabolic response and altered root architecture."
dose-responsePMID 41454215
"Unlike prior reviews that either survey trehalose/T6P signaling or catalog agricultural MOFs and other nanocarriers, we bridge both, extracting design rules (cargo loading routes, gating strategies, soil/leaf triggers), performance metrics (release half-time vs. stress dynamics, dose-response windows, carry-over across growth stages), and risk/translation considerations (biocompatibility, fate,…"
recorded 2026-05-12 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q6
Could one person measure Trehalose's effect on tear osmolarity?
Tear osmolarity: measured in Trehalose's trials.
Interpretation tear osmolarity is the recorded endpoint.
Show the evidence
biomarkers
tear osmolarity; 2026-09-01
human trials at or under30
6
Not recorded for this substance
a recorded half-life
smallest human trial
0; NCT04226924; PHASE2; the smallest recorded human enrolment at or below 30; the registry states no direction of its result; WITHDRAWN
Q7
Which of Trehalose's 2 ongoing trials reports first?
Nitric Oxide Mediated Endothelium-Dependent Vasodilation via Laser Doppler Flowmetry Coupled with Intradermal Microdialysis; Efficacy of C. butyricum in stimulating autophagy; latest 2029-12-31
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT05593549
"Role of Autophagy in Type 2 Diabetes Microvascular Dysfunction"; n 60; "Nitric Oxide Mediated Endothelium-Dependent Vasodilation via Laser Doppler Flowmetry Coupled with Intradermal Microdialysis"; 2029-12-31
NCT07263880
"Clostridium Butyricum in Stenosing Crohn's Desease"; n 40; "Efficacy of C. butyricum in stimulating autophagy"; 2026-10-31
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q8
Which 3 trials of Trehalose posted no result?
Posted no result
3 of 3 completed trials
Registrations
NCT03738358, NCT04426149 and NCT02800161
Completion dates
oldest 2018-03-20; newest 2022-10
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT03738358
2018-03-20
NCT04426149
2018-09-07
NCT02800161
2022-10
Q9
At the median, Trehalose's trials enrolled 20 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
20
Largest enrolment
68
Registered trials counted
11
Q10
What do 20 spontaneous reports say about Trehalose — 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.
Trehalose appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 20 reaction mentions were counted: angina pectoris 2; anxiety disorder 2; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease 2; dementia alzheimer's type 2. open-targets-adr · CHEMBL1236395 · 2026-06-24
Show the evidence
angina pectoris
2
anxiety disorder
2
chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
2
dementia alzheimer's type
2
dermatitis atopic
2
haemorrhoids
2
4 more recorded rows
hypothyroidism
2
iron deficiency anaemia
2
keratitis
2
lung neoplasm malignant
2
recorded 2026-06-24 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q11
Was Trehalose studied with fasting and exercise?
fasting and exercise are named in Trehalose's label sentences: "After fasting for 12 h, the participants performed a 60 min constant-load exercise at 40% V˙O<sub>2</sub> peak using a bicycle ergometer and ingested 500 mL of a trial drink (experiment 1: water, 8% glucose, and 6 or 8% trehalose; experiment 2: 4 or 6% trehalose)." openfda-label+europepmc · 2022-04-23
2 recorded statements; fasting, exercise
Show the evidence
fasting
After fasting for 12 h, the participants performed a 60 min constant-load exercise at 40% V˙O<sub>2</sub> peak using a bicycle ergometer and ingested 500 mL of a trial drink (experiment 1: water, 8% glucose, and 6 or 8% trehalose; experiment 2: 4 or 6% trehalose).
exercise
After fasting for 12 h, the participants performed a 60 min constant-load exercise at 40% V˙O<sub>2</sub> peak using a bicycle ergometer and ingested 500 mL of a trial drink (experiment 1: water, 8% glucose, and 6 or 8% trehalose; experiment 2: 4 or 6% trehalose).
recorded 2022-04-23 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q12
What is recorded about Trehalose and autophagy?
"In neurons, the GLUT8 transporter inhibitors and other disaccharides also activate autophagy, but less effectively than trehalose." — where Trehalose and autophagy appear together. Europe PMC · pathway abstract search · 2026-05-25
"In neurons, the GLUT8 transporter inhibitors and other disaccharides also activate autophagy, but less effectively than trehalose."
PMID 42227127
"Similar to the effect on hepatocytes, trehalose triggers the activation of autophagy by the short signaling pathway pAMPK-pULK1."
AMPKPMID 42227127
"AMPK inhibition prevents the activation of autophagy in neurons and weakens the neurotherapeutic effect of trehalose."
autophagyPMID 42227127
"AMPK inhibition prevents the activation of autophagy in neurons and weakens the neurotherapeutic effect of trehalose."
mTORPMID 42227127
"AMPK activation is accompanied by the pleiotropic effect of suppression of biosynthetic processes and cellular metabolism related to activation of mTOR-dependent autophagy; however, no such effect has been detected for trehalose."
AMPKPMID 42227127
"AMPK activation is accompanied by the pleiotropic effect of suppression of biosynthetic processes and cellular metabolism related to activation of mTOR-dependent autophagy; however, no such effect has been detected for trehalose."
mTORPMID 42227127
"The therapeutic advantages of the molecular effects of trehalose in comparison with the activation of mTOR-dependent autophagy and the possibilities of their combined therapeutic use are discussed."
AMPKPMID 42191057
"The results showed that OSBPL2 deficiency impaired autophagy by inhibiting AMPK-TFEB signalling, resulting in aberrant accumulation of lipid droplets and apoptosis in auditory cells, which could be partially reversed by trehalose treatment."
3 more recorded rows
mTORPMID 41536634
"Key therapeutic targets include mTOR and AMPK, with compounds like rapamycin, trehalose, and resveratrol showing promise in preclinical models."
NAD+
"While the role of GABA-trehalose in Mtb metabolism remains unclear, we postulate that the increased NADH/NAD+ ratio under hypoxia and nitric oxide exposure promotes GABA formation and inhibits its breakdown, leading to GABA accumulation and excretion."
sirtuinPMID 38598192
"L. Cao, S. Zhou, X. Qiu, and S. Qiu, "Trehalose improves palmitic acid-induced apoptosis of osteoblasts by regulating SIRT3-medicated autophagy via the AMPK/mTOR/ULK1 pathway," The FASEB Journal 36, no."
recorded 2026-05-25 · last checked 2026-09-04
Where it is registeredIdentifiers, relations and other names
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 · 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: 9 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.