Tier 1 — highest

Efficacy of oral nicotinamide mononucleotide supplementation on glucose and lipid metabolism for adults: a systematic review with meta-analysis on randomized controlled trials

Jiaqi Zhang, Eric Tsz-Chun Poon, Stephen Heung-Sang Wong
Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition 2025 65(22):4382–4400

Bibliography

PubMed
PMID 39116016
DOI
10.1080/10408398.2024.2387324
Funding
The authors reported no funding associated with the work.
Competing interests
The authors reported no potential conflict of interest.

Study snapshot

DesignSystematic review with random-effects meta-analysis. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and Web of Science were searched; two reviewers independently screened, extracted data and assessed risk of bias using RoB 2.
ModelAdults receiving oral NMN supplementation in controlled clinical studies reporting blood NAD+, glucose or lipid outcomes.
Sample12 studies; 513 participants.
InterventionOral NMN supplementation versus control across included studies.
DurationVaried across the 12 included studies.
EndpointsBlood NAD+; Fasting glucose; Triglycerides; Total cholesterol; LDL cholesterol; HDL cholesterol; Risk of bias

What the study showed, in plain terms

This meta-analysis examined 12 NMN studies involving 513 adults and asked whether NMN meaningfully improves glucose and lipid metabolism.

NMN significantly increased circulating NAD-related measures, but most clinically relevant glucose and lipid outcomes were not significantly different from control.

Importantly, the authors identified methodological concerns in the underlying evidence: seven studies had some risk-of-bias concerns and five were rated high risk, supporting a cautious interpretation of benefit claims.

Key findings

  • 12 studies with 513 participants met the review criteria.
  • NMN supplementation significantly increased blood NAD levels.
  • Most clinically relevant glucose and lipid outcomes did not differ significantly from control.
  • RoB 2 assessment found some concerns in seven studies and high risk of bias in five.
  • The authors warned that benefits of NMN supplementation may be exaggerated in parts of the literature.

What this study can and cannot tell us

The conclusions are constrained by the small number of eligible trials, heterogeneous populations and interventions, and important risk-of-bias concerns in the underlying studies.

An increase in circulating NAD+ is a biochemical effect and should not be interpreted automatically as evidence of improved clinical metabolic health.

Citation network

Articles citing this research paper

5 articles

Biohack Blueprint analyses that reference this study in their evidence base.

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