ArticleNature communications2025
Deciphering the timing and impact of life-extending interventions: temporal efficacy profiler distinguishes early, midlife, and senescence phase efficacies.
Article in Nature communications, 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.
- Embracing non-linearity in human ageing.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2026Review
- Remembrance of things past: Towards a life-course biology of aging.PLoS biology · 2026Article
- Lifespan stops at death, but when does healthspan stop?Biogerontology · 2026Article
- Deciphering the timing and impact of life-extending interventions: temporal efficacy profiler distinguishes early, midlife, and senescence phase efficacies.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Dietary methionine restriction started late in life promotes healthy aging in a sex-specific manner.Science advances · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A growing number of compounds are reported to extend lifespan, but it remains unclear whether they reduce mortality across the entire life course or only at specific ages. This uncertainty persists because the commonly used log-rank test cannot detect age-specific effects. Here, we introduce a new analytical method that addresses this limitation by revealing when, how long, and to what extent interventions alter mortality risk. Applied to survival data from 42 compounds tested in mice by the National Institute on Aging Interventions Testing Program, it identified 22 that reduced mortality at certain ages, more than detected by the log-rank test, while 15 increased mortality at certain ages. Most compounds were effective only within restricted age ranges; just 8 reduced mortality late in life, when burdens of aging are greatest. Compared to conventional methods, this approach uncovers more beneficial and harmful effects, offers deeper insight into timing and mechanism, and can guide development of future anti-aging therapies.
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.