ReviewAdvances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)2025
The Conundrum of XenomiRs and Human Health.
Review in Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nutriepigenetics in Skin Homeostasis: Molecular Mechanisms of Honey-Mediated Chromatin Remodeling in Non-Healing Ulcers.Biomolecules · 2026Review
- The Impact of Nutrition on DNA Methylation: Methodological Challenges in Understanding Cause and Effect.Nutrients · 2026Review
- Plant-derived nanocarriers & nanostructures for barrier-defined translation: a comprehensive review of mechanisms, targets, and translation.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2026Review
- MicroRNA‑microbiome cross‑kingdom networks drive inflammatory bowel disease through dynamic regulatory ecosystems (Review).International journal of molecular medicine · 2026Review
- Cross-kingdom RNA interference in the dysbiosis-mediated network of vocal fold fibrosis: a pathogenic hypothesis and molecular intervention targets.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small, noncoding RNAs involved in posttranscriptional gene regulation in both animal and plant. miRNAs derived from edible plants, referred to as xenomiRs, are proposed to cross-kingdom barriers and to modulate mammalian gene expression. However, this dietary xenomiR hypothesis remains controversial, given numerous inconsistencies and conflicting evidence regarding stability, bioavailability, and functionality of xenomiRs in mammals. Despite promising findings, including reports of plant-derived miRNAs influencing mammalian gene expression in vitro and in animal models, evidence remains inconclusive in humans. Several independent investigations have reported contradictory findings, emphasizing reproducibility lack in identifying and validating the transfer of xenomiRs from plants to mammals, which has raised concerns about the robustness, reliability, and biological significance of some results. Additionally, no direct molecular evidence currently demonstrates that plant xenomiRs bind to mammalian silencing machinery. Although the concept of plant-derived xenomiRs holds significant potential, future research must address unresolved technical and biological limitations. If validated, this hypothesis may represent a novel avenue for epigenetic modulation through dietary intervention in precision medicine and personalized nutrition. This comprehensive narrative review critically provides an overview of the dietary xenomiR hypothesis, specifically focusing on those derived from edible plants. We summarize the current evidence regarding xenomiR cross-kingdom communication potential, and we discuss technical and biological challenges that impede their validation. We also explore the speculative yet plausible scenario that dietary miRNAs may act locally on the microbiota rather than systemically.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.