Tier 3 — preclinical

Feasibility of intravenous injection of pig plasma extracellular particles into rats: an acute study

Nicolás Cherñavsky, Stepheny C. de Campos Zani, Marcelo A. Mori, Nina T. Zanvettor
European Journal of Biological Research 2025 15(2):50–57

Bibliography

DOI
10.5281/zenodo.15319979
Funding
Healthy Life Extension Society (HEALES), Belgium
Competing interests
No conflicts or competing financial interests declared.

Study snapshot

DesignRandomized preclinical acute feasibility and tolerability study with PPEP versus sterile PBS control.
ModelMale 5-week-old Sprague-Dawley rats
Sample6 rats total (3 PPEP; 3 sterile PBS)
Intervention1 mL young-pig-plasma extracellular particle preparation by tail-vein injection on days 1, 3, 5 and 7 versus sterile PBS.
Duration9 days
EndpointsBehavior and general condition; Body weight; Liver histology; Kidney histology; Spleen histology; Acute immune or toxic signals

What the study showed, in plain terms

This small peer-reviewed rat study tested whether repeated intravenous injections of extracellular particles isolated from young pig plasma produced obvious short-term toxicity. Three young rats received the preparation and three received sterile PBS, with injections on days 1, 3, 5 and 7 and necropsy on day 9. No clear acute immune or toxic signal was reported over this brief window. The study addresses feasibility and acute tolerability only; it does not demonstrate rejuvenation.

Key findings

Across the nine-day experiment, the investigators reported no obvious treatment-related adverse behavioral, body-weight or histopathological signal in liver, kidney or spleen following repeated PPEP injections. This supports feasibility for further preclinical study, not anti-aging efficacy.

What this study can and cannot tell us

Only six young rats were studied, with three animals per group and nine days of follow-up. The experiment was designed for acute feasibility/tolerability, not rejuvenation, lifespan, functional recovery or chronic safety. It is separate from the later ICR–Unicamp rejuvenation replication project and should not be used as evidence that the rejuvenation result replicated.

Editorial review

Reviewed by the Biohack Blueprint research team

Last verified

Dr. Khaled Mahmoud, MBBChCritical Care Medicine, Longevity Science & Editorial Direction Dr. Amr Yasser, PhDCardiometabolic, Musculoskeletal, Gut & Bioavailability Dr. Abdulla Mostafa, PhDCellular Senescence, Neurological, Mitochondrial & Brain-Ageing Biology