The National Institute on Aging's Interventions Testing Program (ITP) is the full stop at the end of many a debate over the merits of development of one substance or another as a hoped for treatment to modestly slow aging. The ITP uses a very large number of mice and considerable rigor to assess effects on life span. The program typically focuses on small molecules and supplements that have prior evidence for anti-aging effects, and usually those with a long history in the literature. Given the number of compounds that show no effect on life span in the hands of the ITP, this initiative serves as a reminder that any one study in a hundred mice that demonstrates modest slowing of aging does not in fact carry a great deal of weight. There are many such studies in the history of compounds that the ITP has shown to have no effect on life span.
There is always room to argue about dosing and methodology; there was some of that after the ITP reported that fisetin has no effect on longevity. But one can't argue with the large number of mice used and the efforts to impose rigor on the experimental process. Today's open access paper is the latest ITP publication in which possibly promising ways to modestly slow aging were demonstrated to have no effect once studied more rigorously. Of note, α-ketoglutarate is in the list; this had promising data in mice, considerable interest from a number of research and development groups, and made it all the way to a human clinical trial - which failed. In earlier mouse studies, α-ketoglutarate dosing was lifelong. The ITP tried starting at 18 months of age, which didn't work, and here tried starting at 7 months of aging, which also didn't work. If you'd like to look over the data, it can be found at the Mouse Phenome Database.
At a high level, the ITP results obtained over the years can be taken as support for the idea that attempting to discover bioactive molecules that favorably manipulate metabolism is not a viable path forward. It is very challenging, results vary meaningfully between groups, between species, by dose, by age of onset of treatment, and after all of that the best expected outcome is only a modest slowing of aging. This is not a good approach to the problem of aging. Instead, rational design of therapies that can repair known forms of cell and tissue damage seems far more likely to succeed in producing large enough and robust enough effects to care about.
The Interventions Testing Program (ITP) evaluated eleven compounds in genetically heterogeneous UM-HET3 mice to assess their potential to extend lifespan. These interventions included both novel agents and previously tested compounds administered at novel doses or starting ages. Despite prior evidence suggesting lifespan benefits of these proposed interventions in other models or under different conditions, none of the tested compounds significantly increased lifespan in male or female mice. Notably, astaxanthin, mitoglitazone, and meclizine - previously associated with lifespan extension in the ITP - showed no benefit when administered at different doses or starting at later ages.
In females, astaxanthin, late-start mitoglitazone, and pioglitazone were associated with significantly reduced lifespan when pooling the data from all three sites. However, site-specific analysis revealed unusually long lifespans in control females at The Jackson Laboratory, prompting reanalysis using data from the other two sites and only showed a negative effect for mitoglitazone and pioglitazone. This study underscores the importance of rigorous, multi-site testing and highlights the challenges of translating promising initial findings into consistent lifespan benefits at other doses or with alternate starting ages. These results suggest that timing and dosage are critical variables in aging intervention studies and reinforce the need for cautious interpretation of single-site or single-cohort findings.
View the full article at FightAging
