Longevity Supplement Improved Blood Vessels in a Human Trial

In a clinical trial, the supplement NOVOS Core was associated with significant improvements in artery function and systolic blood pressure. It is unknown which particular ingredients are responsible for the effect [1].

To the Core of the matter

Led by Christian Heiss, Professor of Cardiovascular Medicine, researchers at the University of Surrey put NOVOS Core, a supplement marketed for longevity, to the test in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. NOVOS supplied the supplement and matching placebo and helped fund the study, which was published earlier this week in the European Heart Journal Open.

The blood vessels’ inner lining (endothelium) senses changes in blood flow and releases signals that command the surrounding muscle to relax in order to accommodate increased volume. With age, the endothelium generally becomes less responsive to increases in blood flow [2]. Arteries also become stiffer, and systolic blood pressure tends to rise [3].

Several processes of aging can damage vascular function, including chronic inflammation, oxidative stress, and mitochondrial dysfunction. While the trial focused on cardiovascular health, NOVOS claims to have designed the multi-ingredient formula “to target the hallmarks of aging together.”

NOVOS Core contains glycine, calcium alpha-ketoglutarate, glucosamine sulfate, magnesium malate, vitamin C, L-theanine, fisetin, pterostilbene, hyaluronic acid, lithium aspartate, and extracts of rhodiola and ginger. According to NOVOS, these ingredients were selected based on previous evidence. However, the trial tested the mixture as a whole, not the contribution of particular ingredients or their mechanisms of action.

Flex your arteries

The researchers randomly assigned 61 participants to the supplement or placebo. Participants were generally healthy, nonsmoking adults. The control group was older on average: 60 versus 53 at enrollment and 59 versus 54 among those included in the primary analysis. This is a considerable discrepancy, especially for a study investigating age-related changes.

The average blood pressure was 128/75 mmHg in the study group and 125/75 mmHg in the placebo group. Therefore, none was a population with severe hypertension. People with unstable cardiovascular disease were excluded. Participants took one 15-gram dose of powder daily.

The researchers investigated both short-term and long-term effects. They assessed vascular function at three time points: immediately before the first dose to establish baseline; one hour after the first dose to measure the acute response; and six months later. That last measurement was taken 24 hours after the most recent dose to try to reduce its residual acute effect. However, as the authors acknowledge, this effect could not be completely ruled out.

43 participants were included in the primary analysis: 24 on the supplement and 19 on placebo. Most of the attrition was unexplained. Such a high level of attrition might have affected the results by meaningfully changing the groups’ composition, although there is no direct evidence of that.

The supplement significantly improved flow-mediated dilation (FMD) at six months, the study’s primary endpoint. FMD is measured by how much an arm artery widens when blood flow renews after a cuff is released. It increased by 2.6 percentage points in the supplement group, from about 5.5% to 8.1%, while remaining steady in the placebo group – a substantial and potentially clinically relevant improvement. The adjusted improvement versus placebo was 2.9 percentage points. The acute increase, measured one hour after the first dose, was 3.4 percentage points (3.9 points adjusted versus placebo).

The researchers also assessed pulse wave velocity (PWV), which shows how quickly a pressure wave travels through the arteries. Stiffer arteries generally transmit it faster. At six months, PWV decreased by 0.78 m/s in the supplement group and increased by 0.56 m/s in controls. The adjusted between-group difference was -1.18 m/s. The acute difference in PWV trended in favor of the supplement but was not statistically significant, suggesting a clearer long-term effect.

At six months, systolic blood pressure had fallen by 8.5 mmHg in the supplement group and by 1.5 mmHg in the placebo group. The adjusted difference was 6.1 mmHg.

Blood pressure, too, was measured only on the first day and at follow-up. At each time point, participants rested for at least five minutes before the researchers took two readings and averaged them. However, blood pressure is highly susceptible to factors such as sleep quality the night before, so readings from just two days may not fully reflect long-term changes. Changes in diastolic pressure did not differ significantly between groups.

No lipid benefits

The researchers found no statistically significant between-group differences in total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, or triglycerides. This suggests that changes in blood lipid levels were unlikely to be the main driver of the vascular improvements. Finally, calculated ten-year cardiovascular risk improved modestly relative to placebo, largely because of the lower systolic pressure.

“Our hypothesis in this study was whether a multi-component supplement addresses many biological and biochemical processes related to vascular aging and has an effect on measures of vascular health. We found favourable changes in endothelial function, arterial stiffness and systolic blood pressure after six months,” Heiss said in a press release.

“It’s an exciting result, but the effect size is surprisingly large,” said Brad Stanfield, a longevity physician who was not involved in the study, to Lifespan News. “FMD rose by almost 3 percentage points, more than double what cocoa flavanols achieved in this same research group’s earlier trials. FMD is also a surrogate: people with better scores have fewer heart attacks, but I’m not aware of any trial showing that raising it with a treatment prevents them. The 6-mmHg drop in systolic blood pressure would matter more, if it holds up.”

Stanfield also noted the study’s limitations: “With nearly a third of participants lost to follow-up and a control group seven years older, I’d want an independent group to replicate this before drawing conclusions.”

Literature

[1] Piercy, C., Harris, J., Sackho, K., Campagnolo, P., Barardo, D., Creagh-Brown, B., & Heiss, C. (2026). Acute and 6-Month Vascular Effects of a Multi-Component Nutritional Supplement: A Randomised Controlled Trial Available at SSRN 6241278.

[2] Königstein, K., Wagner, J., Frei, M., Knaier, R., Klenk, C., Carrard, J., … & Schmidt-Trucksäss, A. (2021). Endothelial function of healthy adults from 20 to 91 years of age: prediction of cardiovascular risk by vasoactive range. Journal of hypertension, 39(7), 1361-1369.

[3] Scuteri, A., Morrell, C. H., Orrù, M., Strait, J. B., Tarasov, K. V., Ferreli, L. A. P., … & Lakatta, E. G. (2014). Longitudinal perspective on the conundrum of central arterial stiffness, blood pressure, and aging. Hypertension, 64(6), 1219-1227.

[4] Ungvari, Z., Sonntag, W. E., & Csiszar, A. (2010). Mitochondria and aging in the vascular system. Journal of molecular medicine, 88(10), 1021-1027.