The Effect of Nicotinamide Mononucleotide and Riboside on Skeletal Mus

DesignSystematic review and random-effects meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled NMN and nicotinamide riboside trials

PopulationPrimarily middle-aged and older adults in NAD-precursor randomized trials

SampleMultiple NMN and NR randomized trials; NMN-specific pooled evidence was limited

InterventionNMN or nicotinamide riboside versus placebo

EndpointsSkeletal muscle index; Handgrip strength; Gait speed; Chair-stand and physical-performance tests; Muscle mass and strength measures

What the publication reported

This systematic review examined randomized trials of two NAD precursors, NMN and nicotinamide riboside, for skeletal-muscle mass and function.

The pooled evidence did not show convincing improvements in the main muscle-mass or function measures attributable to NMN. The available NMN evidence was small and heterogeneous.

Because the review combines two different NAD precursors, its overall results should not be treated as an NMN-only efficacy estimate.

Key findings

The review evaluated skeletal-muscle mass and functional outcomes across randomized NAD-precursor trials.
Pooled evidence did not support consistent NMN-related improvements in core muscle outcomes.
The NMN evidence base was smaller than the broader combined NMN/NR literature.
The authors concluded that current evidence does not support these precursors for preserving muscle mass or function in older adults.

What it cannot establish

The review combines NMN and nicotinamide riboside, which are distinct interventions.
NMN-specific trial numbers were limited.
Underlying trials were small and short.
Different functional tests and populations created heterogeneity.

HealthspanX claim boundary: This review does not establish that NMN prevents sarcopenia or improves muscle mass, grip strength, gait speed or physical function.

Source identifiers

DOI: 10.1002/jcsm.13799
PubMed: PMID 40275690
PubMed Central: PMC12022230
Trial registration: Not applicable.
Publication type: Systematic review and meta-analysis
Publication: Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle, 2025. 16(3):e13799

Transparency

Funding: The authors reported no specific funding for this work.
Declared interests: See source publication for author disclosures.

HealthspanX observation: Because NMN and NR are pooled in parts of this review, NMN-specific conclusions should be separated from broader NAD-precursor conclusions.

Interpretive status: LimitedSystematic review and meta-analysis of NAD-precursor trials; NMN-specific evidence remains sparse and does not show consistent improvements in muscle mass or function.

Continue reviewing

Return to the complete evidence library.

Evidence Center Ultra Pure NMN

Source fields verified 20 September 2026