Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34555343›Full record

ReviewCell metabolism2021

Evaluating the beneficial effects of dietary restrictions: A framework for precision nutrigeroscience.

Kenneth A Wilson, Manish Chamoli, Tyler A Hilsabeck, Manish Pandey, Sakshi Bansal, Geetanjali Chawla, Pankaj Kapahi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cell metabolism, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Nutritional modulation of antitumor immunity.Current opinion in immunology · 2024
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Late-life shift in caloric intake affects fly metabolism and longevity.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Kenneth A WilsonThe Buck Institute for Research on Aging, Novato, CA 94945, USA.
Manish ChamoliThe Buck Institute for Research on Aging, Novato, CA 94945, USA.
Tyler A HilsabeckThe Buck Institute for Research on Aging, Novato, CA 94945, USA; Leonard Davis School of Gerontology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089, USA.
Manish PandeyRegional Centre for Biotechnology, Faridabad, Haryana 121001, India.
Sakshi BansalRegional Centre for Biotechnology, Faridabad, Haryana 121001, India.
Geetanjali ChawlaRegional Centre for Biotechnology, Faridabad, Haryana 121001, India. Electronic address: gchawla@rcb.res.in.
Pankaj KapahiThe Buck Institute for Research on Aging, Novato, CA 94945, USA; Leonard Davis School of Gerontology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089, USA. Electronic address: pkapahi@buckinstitute.org.

Funding

Training in Basic Research on Aging and Age-Related DiseaseT32AG000266 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIF-LAWRENC BERKELEY LAB · PI Lisa M Ellerby · 1998 to 2026
$13.8M
Advanced glycation endproducts (AGEs) as metabolic by-products that mediate neurodegeneration.R01AG061165 · NIA · BUCK INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH ON AGING · PI KAPAHI, PANKAJ · 2019 to 2023
$3.3M
Molecular Mechanisms of Lifespan Extension by Dietary Restriction in DrosophilaR01AG038688 · NIA · BUCK INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH ON AGING · PI KAPAHI, PANKAJ · 2011 to 2015
$2.3M
Targeting conserved diet-responsive transcriptional networks in neurons to slow neurodegeneration in Alzheimer's diseaseR21AG072663 · NIA · BUCK INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH ON AGING · PI KAPAHI, PANKAJ · 2021 to 2021
$534k
DBT-Wellcome Trust India Alliance IA/S/17/1/503085DBT/Wellcome Trust India Alliance IA/I(S)/17/1/503085NIA NIH HHS R01 AG038688NIA NIH HHS R01 AG061165NIA NIH HHS R21 AG072663NIA NIH HHS T32 AG000266
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dietary restriction (DR) has long been viewed as the most robust nongenetic means to extend lifespan and healthspan. Many aging-associated mechanisms are nutrient responsive, but despite the ubiquitous functions of these pathways, the benefits of DR often vary among individuals and even among tissues within an individual, challenging the aging research field. Furthermore, it is often assumed that lifespan interventions like DR will also extend healthspan, which is thus often ignored in aging studies. In this review, we provide an overview of DR as an intervention and discuss the mechanisms by which it affects lifespan and various healthspan measures. We also review studies that demonstrate exceptions to the standing paradigm of DR being beneficial, thus raising new questions that future studies must address. We detail critical factors for the proposed field of precision nutrigeroscience, which would utilize individualized treatments and predict outcomes using biomarkers based on genotype, sex, tissue, and age.

Indexed as

Caloric RestrictionLongevityAgingHumansagingbiomarkerscaloric restrictiondietary restrictionhealthspanlifespanprecision medicineprecision nutrigerosciencesenescence

Identifiers

PMID34555343
PMCPMC8845500

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.