Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42865256›Full record

ReviewBiochemical Society transactions2026

Increasing autophagy with fasting and diet: separating fact from fiction.

Sanjna Singh, Timothy J Sargeant

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Biochemical Society transactions, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Sanjna SinghSchool of Pharmacy and Biomedical Science, College of Health, Adelaide University, Adelaide, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2272-6895
Timothy J SargeantSchool of Pharmacy and Biomedical Science, College of Health, Adelaide University, Adelaide, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1254-4390

Funding

DHAC | National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) 2027655
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Autophagy is the cell's recycling system; it removes unwanted or dysfunctional cellular material, thereby preventing damage. Importantly, it is a key pro-survival pathway during periods of stress, for instance, during nutrient scarcity. As it can support nutrition during starvation, it is not surprising that autophagy is controlled by nutrient availability. As a result, diet-based strategies to modify autophagy have attracted considerable scientific and public interest, although what is presented to the public is often not supported by a solid scientific foundation. Evidence from animal models is compelling: several of these interventions robustly activate autophagy and are linked to improved lifespan and healthspan. Data from humans, however, are much more limited. Many human studies rely on measurement of steady-state levels of autophagy genes or proteins, metrics that do not independently establish pathway activity. Far fewer have measured autophagic 'flux', the more rigorous readout of turnover, and where they have, findings are often negative or inconclusive. Here, we review the human research on popular nutritional interventions purported to change autophagy-including prolonged fasting, intermittent fasting, calorie restriction, and altered macronutrient intake-and contrast these findings with the preclinical evidence that has shaped public expectations. We highlight key gaps in the literature, particularly the scarcity of flux-based measurements and the reliance on blood as a proxy for autophagy in other, less accessible tissues. Refining how we monitor autophagy in humans should be a key priority for the field and is ultimately needed to establish whether and how diet modulates human autophagy.

Indexed as

AutophagyDietFastingAnimalsCaloric RestrictionHumansIntermittent Fastingautophagycalorie restrictionfastingintermittent fasting

Identifiers

PMID42865256

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.