Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39919936›Full record

Trial reportNeurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics2025

Carnosine supplementation improves cognitive outcomes in younger participants of the NEAT trial.

Timothy E O'Toole, Alok R Amraotkar, Hong Gao, Clara G Sears, Shesh N Rai, Mathias Basner, Aruni Bhatnagar

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03314987 (Nucleophilic Defense Against PM Toxicity), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

NCT03314987 nacompletednot on this map

Nucleophilic Defense Against PM Toxicity

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of LouisvilleRan2018 to 2022Enrolled299ConditionsAir Pollution ToxicityArmsL-carnosine, placebo
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
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.

Timothy E O'TooleChristina Lee Brown Envirome Institute, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA; Division of Environmental Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA. Electronic address: tim.otoole@louisville.edu.
Alok R AmraotkarChristina Lee Brown Envirome Institute, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA; Division of Environmental Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA.
Hong GaoChristina Lee Brown Envirome Institute, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA; Division of Environmental Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA.
Clara G SearsChristina Lee Brown Envirome Institute, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA; Division of Environmental Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA.
Shesh N RaiBiostatistics and Informatics Shared Resource, University of Cincinnati Cancer Center; Cancer Data Science Center, Department of Biostatistics, Health Informatics and Data Sciences, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Mathias BasnerUnit of Experimental Psychiatry, Division of Sleep and Chronobiology, Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Aruni BhatnagarChristina Lee Brown Envirome Institute, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA; Division of Environmental Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Some prior studies suggested that supplementation with carnosine or β-alanine can improve cognitive abilities and neurodegenerative disorders in certain elderly or at-risk populations. However, the efficacy of carnosine in improving cognitive performance in a healthy, adult population has not been assessed. We examined this as a post-hoc secondary outcome in the placebo-controlled, randomized Nucleophilic Defense Against PM Toxicity (NEAT) clinical trial (NCT03314987). Participants in this trial were instructed to take either cornstarch (placebo) or carnosine capsules (2g daily) for up to 12wk. Cognitive ability was assessed using the Cognition test battery, which consists of ten individual tests known to engage specific brain systems and covering a range of cognitive domains. Speed, accuracy, and efficiency were obtained for the whole battery as well as for each of the ten individual tests. Participant testing occurred at baseline, prior to randomization, after approximately 6wk of supplementation (Follow-up-1), and after approximately 12wk of supplementation (Follow-up-2). Of the 299 participants who were randomized, we obtained useable measures for 242 participants at Follow-up-1 and 231 ​at Follow-up-2. Age-based stratification (23-35 years, 36-50 years, 51-65 years), showed statistically significant improvements in overall speed and efficiency in the youngest age group stratum at both follow-up visits. This same group also demonstrated significant improvements in seven speed or accuracy scores of the individual tests. The other age groups demonstrated few or no significant improvements. Thus, in a study population largely devoid of susceptibility factors or pre-existing conditions, carnosine supplementation selectively improved high-level cognitive performance in young individuals.

Indexed as

CarnosineCognitionDietary SupplementsAdultDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeuropsychological TestsTreatment OutcomeYoung AdultCarnosineCarnosineClinical trialCognition

Identifiers

PMID39919936
PMCPMC12014415

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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 Socratic graph.