RESEARKA

Several methodological challenges complicate the interpretation of Curcumin inflammaging evidence and define the boundary conditions for future research. First, the heterogeneity of curcumin formulations across trials—including turmeric powder, standardized extracts, nano-curcumin, phospholipid complexes, and hydrolyzed preparations at doses ranging from 80 mg/day (Gerami 2025) to 1500 mg/day (Helder 2025)—renders cross-trial comparison difficult and may explain discordant findings within the same disease population. Second, intervention durations across the evidence base span from as short as 4 weeks to 12 months (Zeng 2022), and the optimal treatment period for modulating inflammaging biomarkers—particularly in older adults, who are underrepresented in most trials—remains undefined. Third, many curcumin trials combine supplementation with concurrent lifestyle interventions such as resistance training (Flensted-Jensen 2025, Flensted-Jensen 2025b) or dietary modifications (Bourbour 2025, Sukatta 2025), making it impossible to isolate the independent anti-inflammatory contribution of curcumin itself. Finally, the cross-study disagreement map of the present evidence synthesis reveals cross-study disagreements across outcome classes, with particularly pronounced disagreements in the immune and dosing-pharmacokinetics domains—underscoring that the Curcumin inflammaging hypothesis, while biologically plausible, has not yet achieved the evidentiary consistency required to support clinical recommendations for aging populations.

Citation Support

• source_1 Flensted-Jensen 2025
• source_2 Flensted-Jensen 2025b
• source_3 Xu 2025
• source_4 El-Rakabawy 2025
• source_5 Schonenberger 2025