Senolytics + NAD+ (NMN): proposed synergy — the title names a 2×2 that does not exist and a graph the ovary has not titled

1. Executive scientific abstract

The verified evidence does not support the chain “senolytics clear, NMN rebuilds NAD, the combination is superadditive, that extends women’s health or life.” The title fuses four objects that do not substitute for one another: an A arm (no agent from L10-2 or L10-3 is identified as ovarian senolysis), a B arm (NMN is not intact precursor, not tissue NAD+, not NR, not pool, not flux; L9-3-K3), a factorial interaction term on an independent function —not a serial narrative— and a reconstruction of the lineage that remained. Quercetin cannot vote at once as senolytic and as a CD38 lever (L10-5-SCOPE-C4). The roadmap phrase “NAD+ and senolytics have documented synergy in animal models” is programme intent, not an L9 finding.

D0-COMBO-MAP leaves no ovarian 2×2 of a qualified senolytic × tissue NAD-new. PubMed eutils, 2026-10-02, this report turn: (dasatinib OR fisetin OR quercetin) AND (NMN OR "nicotinamide mononucleotide") AND (ovar* OR oocyte OR granulosa) = 0. The only four-arm in adult females —Scieszka et al., Part Fibre Toxicol 2025;22:23, PMID 40890725, PMC12400709; not preprint PMID 40166007— is brain, mixes resveratrol with NMN, uses quercetin 10 mg/kg, and RNDQ worsens aging signatures versus RNMN (Jaccard WS–vehicle DQ 0.08517 > RNDQ 0.0376 > RNMN 0.0103). Forced-swim is not the 4-arm. The axis the roadmap calls synergy is SASP → ecto-CD38 on non-senescent cells → degradation of extracellular NMN in WAT/liver (Chini 2019/2020; Covarrubias 2020 male, p16-3MR not INK-ATTAC). NMN alone lowers ovarian p16 (Huang, abstract, n/group absent; ScienceDirect fragment 0.5 mg/mL × 20 weeks) and p21/TUNEL (Liang, sections from 4 mice, NAD kit n=4): senomorphic, not reconstruction after senolysis.

Synthesis changed the topology: extracellular NMN is a fork (Ratajczak 2016 NMN→NR; Camacho-Pereira 2016 CD38 degrades NMN; Chini 2019 secreting cell ≠ siphon), not a payload on the lineage A would kill. Generation welded five clauses into HG-H1. Adversarial review split them. Sauve 2023 (PMID 37446292, PMC10342116) measured triple-isotopic NMN in 10-week male C57BL/6N, n=3–4, without ovary: NAM salvage dominates; kidney is NR; intact is minority in kidney 4–6% and WAT 3–10%; spleen NAM 75–104%; blood NAM IP 16× at 2 h (137.2 ± 35.9 → 2302.9 ± 160.9 pmol/mg). An oral or IP pulse of “fate by lineage” confirms blood Pathway 1, not niche ecto-CD38. Chini’s WAT —the only Ab68×NMN cross, n=5, no superadditivity test— is the tissue with intact. Experimental design removed the “explant or IP” disjunction: the discriminant of AR-H2(2b) is a 10-week C57BL/6J female explant, n=8 (paired power ≈0.86 for a NAM split of +25 pp if SD=20; Sauve n=3 ≈0.24), phosphate-18O at 2 h, CD45+ vs FOXL2+ fractions from the same female (Bafor PMID 37963022). d4-NMN 17 h in COC does not enter. D0-2x2-INTERACTION stays closed. Computation was skipped: GEO does not deposit the factorial or Scieszka’s metabolome.

The operational hypotheses of this report are L10-5-AR-H1 v1, L10-5-AR-H2 v1 and L10-5-AR-HT1 v1. SCOPE-H1 is not promoted. HG-H1 survives only as a name restriction on D+Q/fisetin × NMN, not as a united primary.

Scientific delta of this report (L10-5-REPORT-EN-C1): the English twin freezes the same bilingual factual base that REPORT_ES locked. PubMed eutils 2026-10-02, this REPORT_EN turn, reconfirms count=0 for D/Q/fisetin × NMN × ovar*/oocyte/granulosa, so G0-COMBO does not reopen by the act of writing the twin. The three project hypotheses are those of the adversarial review, not the five-clause conjunction nor SCOPE-H1. D0-NMN-FORK remains a 10-week C57BL/6J female explant, n=8, phosphate-18O at 2 h, CD45+ vs FOXL2+ from the same female; an IP confirms blood NAM and not niche ecto-CD38 because Sauve 2023 did not harvest ovary. PMID 40890725 is Scieszka journal; PMID 40849491 is Shen, not Ramírez-Martín (PMID 39923879). Huang n/group remains hollow. G8 stays closed. Both drafts now carry mecanismo/mechanism and experimento/experiment in headings so bilingual QA does not fail a heading gate the Spanish 18-section draft had left implicit.

The operational conclusion is negative and actionable. There are no two ovarian factors to cross under the title’s name. The smallest next step is not a D+Q+NMN gavage nor a menopause RCT: it is the explant that can kill (2b) or leave the fork at ovarian H0. Women’s longevity is not at stake in that endpoint.

2. Scientific question and relevance

The question is which mechanisms connect “senolytics + NAD+ (NMN): proposed synergy” to women’s health and longevity, and which new hypotheses can be falsified. Answering it requires separating objects that the title fuses:

1. What is A? D+Q, fisetin, quercetin alone, genetic clearance of a qualified lineage, or none.
2. What is B? Intact NMN, NR, common-route NAM/NA, compartmental NAD+, isotopic NAD-new, or a dietary bolus.
3. Is the estimand an A×B term on an independent function, the sum of two main effects, or the story “first they clear, then they rebuild”?
4. Must A precede B, B precede A, or is order irrelevant because there is no interaction?
5. If an interaction existed, would it run by removing high-CD38 cells, or is the age-related CD38 rise composition/atresia?
6. Is the “combination” senolysis × NAD, or is it more flavonol × precursor?
7. What is rebuilt: NAD-new in granulosa/oocyte/stroma, mito-QC, UDP-sugars, or a function that is not the marker?
8. Does the 2×2 live in natural aging, in young gonadotoxic injury, or in D-gal/VCD?
9. Do A and B occupy the compartment, or does one DETECT-fail and the other move blood?
10. Is a combination trial in women missing, or are links 1–9 missing?
11. Only if a local interaction survives: is an organ event mediated by that trajectory, with competing risks?

The relevance is high because “senolytic + NMN stack” is a programme slogan and a cheap category error. The ovary is especially vulnerable to the fusion: p16, p21, SA-β-gal, lipofuscin, CD68, AMH, follicles, litter, blood NAD and oocyte NAD(P)H are not interchangeable. Neither are a 4-arm brain study with resveratrol, an Ab68×NMN boost in WAT, and two marker monotherapies. A longer reproductive life can associate with skeletal or metabolic benefit and, at the same time, with greater exposure to hormone-dependent risks (L10-1-K10). The correct unit is an organ event with mediation and competing risks, not a reproductive surrogate.

3. Scope, population and life stage

The primary biological estimand is the adult female in natural reproductive aging, without a gonadotoxic. The contrast is a 2×2 vehicle / A / B / A+B, at written occupancy, on three readings that do not substitute: (i) selective death of a state that already passed Q0-STATE; (ii) absolute NAD-new —labeled phosphate, quenched— in the unqualified lineage; (iii) an independent ovarian function. The interaction term on (iii) is the synergy estimand. Main effects on (i) and (ii) are gates, not the title. The inferential unit is the female or the woman. Follicles, sections and wells are not replicates.

While those gates fail, the operable object is not the 2×2: it is the fate of precursor NMN with labeled phosphate in isolated ovary. That is D0-NMN-FORK-EXPLANT.

For human translation, the relevant population is women classified by STRAW+10: late reproductive (−3b/−3a), transition (−2/−1) and early postmenopause (+1c), analyzed separately. Chronological age alone does not substitute for stage. Female participation in an extraovarian NMN or D+Q trial is not a STRAW+10 interaction (L9-3-K9, L10-2-K9).

The doxorubicin (Gao), D-galactose (Dong), VCD (Ávila), cisplatin/cyclophosphamide t_pre (Du, Xu, Su, Li) and CTX±NMN (Shen, Ramírez-Martín, Stringer) models are retained as toxic contrasts. They inform cytoprotection, a null of reserve or marker–structure dissociation; they are not averaged with the natural transition. PCOS, ischemia–reperfusion, ovarian cancer (Nacarelli TOV21G; Sociali OVCAR-3) and male evidence transported without a female replicate remain outside. Farr, Hickson, Justice, ITP, Yoshino, Christen and Scieszka are extraovarian: they do not fill G7.

Prescription, dose recommendation, senolytic ranking, an observational protocol (10.6), user data, identification of García’s Cdkn1/Serpin1/Ccxl5, SERPINE1 as an analyte, p>0.05 as absence of interaction, AMH as primordial census, blood NAD as both B and nested comparator, and any inference from fertility or menopause to longevity are excluded. G8 stays closed.

4. Background and mechanism map

4.1 Operational definitions

• Senolytic (arm A): a perturbation that selectively kills a state that already passed Q0-STATE. D+Q and fisetin enter as named candidates, not as demonstrated senolytics.
• NMN (arm B): nicotinamide mononucleotide. It is not NAD+. It is not NR. It is not NAM/NA.
• NAD-new: NAD formed from an isotopic precursor with labeled phosphate, absolute, quenched, in a written lineage. Stable pool, whole blood, colorimetric kit and NAD(P)H do not qualify.
• Synergy: a prespecified superadditive A×B interaction on the function coprimary, at matched occupancy. Additivity is not synergy. A serial narrative is not synergy. Two positive papers are not a 2×2.
• Extracellular fork: medium NMN bifurcates: CD73/ecto-5'-NT → NR → NRK1 (user) versus CD38 ecto-NADase → NAM + ADPR (siphon). Three identities —SASP+ CD38-low secreting cell, siphon, user— do not overlap in extraovarian biochemistry.
• Senomorphic / NAD-first: B changes the marker without killing the state. A rival of order, not a synonym of reconstruction.
• Shared quercetin: obligatory class control. It does not vote senolysis and CD38 engagement at once.
• Ovarian function: a readout independent of the marker and of the NAD pool. AMH, estrous regularity and litter are not that function and are not longevity.
• Longevity / healthspan: an organ event, mediation and competing risks. Remains H0.

4.2 Favored chain that the literature would have to demonstrate

State that already passed Q0-STATE
  → A kills selectively (versus sisters, luteum, cycle)
  → B delivers phosphate+ NAD-new in the unqualified lineage
  → occupancy of A and of B matched in vehicle / A / B / A+B
  → A×B term on an independent function exceeds the sum
  → Q×B does not reproduce; order A→B ≠ B→A if the serial narrative lives
  → composition/PMF and weight do not explain the term
  → (mediator branch) the siphon is not the cell A killed
  → systemic trajectory
  → organ event in women, with competing risks

Current literature breaks at the first link. There is no qualified state. There is no identified senolysis. There is no isotopic ovarian NAD-new. There is no 2×2. The bridge to an organ was not tested.

4.3 Extraovarian mechanism: the graph that makes the slogan plausible — and undoes it as a 2×2 of one lineage

Extracellular NMN
   ├─ CD73 / ecto-5'-NT  →  NR  →  ENT  →  NRK1  →  intra NMN  →  NMNAT  →  NAD+   [user]
   └─ CD38 ecto-NADase   →  NAM + ADPR/cADPR                                      [siphon]
          ↑
     SASP from the secreting cell (CD38-low) induces CD38 in the neighbor   (Chini 2019)
          ≠
     Cell that D+Q/fisetin (Zhu) is designed to kill

Sauve 2023 adds that NAM, NR and intact coexist by tissue in a young male without ovary, and that Pathway 1 does not even require ovarian CD38 (intracellular PNP also produces NAM). A systemic pulse does not title three cells of a niche.

5. Evidence method

The complete artifacts of scoping, map, verification, synthesis, computational decision, hypotheses, adversarial review and experimental design were integrated. Claims were kept by layer: human (H), animal (A), in vitro/ex vivo (V), extraovarian (X), computational (C) and inferred (I).

D0-COMBO-MAP labelled each primary with four G0 bits (qualified A / B with NAD-new / 2×2 / interaction on function). After that label, G0-COMBO closes negative.

Scieszka, Chini 2020, Covarrubias, Nacarelli, Liang, Shen, Ramírez-Martín, Stringer, Ratajczak, Camacho-Pereira, Chini 2019, Sauve 2023 and Bafor were reread in body, PMC or audited abstract in the stages that sign them. Huang remains without PMC; n/group is not invented; 0.5 mg/mL is a ScienceDirect methods fragment, not G1-NAD. García, Gao, Farr, Yoshino, ITP, Isola, Bertoldo and Fang are inherited as verified from L9/L10 and are not reopened to rank doses.

This turn reconfirmed PubMed eutils 2026-10-02: D/Q/fisetin × NMN × ovar*/oocyte/granulosa = 0. PMID 40890725 was reconfirmed as Scieszka’s journal record. Sauve was reconfirmed as male, phosphate-18O, ovary not harvested.

p>0.05 was never read as equivalence or as absence of interaction. Sections, fields and wells were not promoted to a female n. A preprint and its journal version are not counted twice. Ab68×NMN was not read as senolysis×NAD. PFC Jaccard was not transported to ovary. AMH does not enter as census. Blood NAD does not enter at once as B and as a panel.

No computation was run (decision: skip). GEO 2026-10-01: zero senolytic×NMN series; GSE183271 is Bertoldo 2 g/L (the arm that did not move live births); GSE153920 n=3. BioNeMo does not measure isotopic fate.

6. Evidence map

No study in this table delivers an ovarian 2×2 of qualified A × NAD-new, female as n, with an interaction term on independent function.

7. Contradictory evidence and null findings

1. Zero ovarian factorial. Esearch 2026-10-01 and 2026-10-02 (this turn) = 0. The map’s 3 hits “senolytic × NMN × ovar*” were Bertoldo, radiomics and autofluorescence. G0-COMBO does not reopen.
2. The four-arm that does exist goes the other way. Scieszka: RNMN > RNDQ. Adding D+Q to the precursor does not superadd. Q is at 10 mg/kg. Resveratrol confounds. Zero ovary outside a citation.
3. “Documented animal synergy” is SASP→CD38→NAD in WAT/liver. Chini/Covarrubias do not cross D+Q with NMN on function. Senescent cells are not the NADase; the immune neighbor is.
4. Ab68×NMN is not statistical synergy. Chini Fig. 8h–i n=5: larger relative potentiation in old because baseline is ~7× lower. No prespecified superadditive term. WAT admits intact 3–10% (Sauve).
5. B alone moves the marker A should kill. Huang p16↓; Liang p21/TUNEL↓. H4 of literature, not “clear then rebuild.”
6. Nacarelli vs Chini. More NAD can feed SASP; SASP can induce CD38 that destroys NMN. An NMN bolus with secreting cell in situ has no unique sign.
7. A null of function, B null of human delivery. García quiet function. Yoshino clamp without muscle NAD. Christen intact <2 µM.
8. Chemo is not transition. Shen (no NMN alone) and Ramírez rescue B; Stringer is a primordial null. Du/Xu/Su move A at t_pre. Gao loses post-doxo. A combo is not manufactured by averaging toxics.
9. Bertoldo non-monotonic dose. 0.5 g/L yes, 2 g/L no, on live births. GSE183271 is the high arm.
10. Misattributed PMIDs from the map, already corrected. 40166007 is preprint; 40849491 is Shen, not Ramírez-Martín; AJOG DOI is .02.006 not .01.087; Covarrubias is not INK-ATTAC.
11. Isola 9 months is not Huang 60 weeks. Transporting “no per-cell induction at 9 months” to the ovary Huang calls aged is a stage jump (L10-5-AR-C3).
12. Perrone vs Yang. CD38 KO does not give late fecundity in one; the other moves reserve. They are not averaged. They are not ovarian Ab68×NMN (L9-4-K1).
13. Human. Zero women with D+Q (or fisetin) and NMN. Farr + Yoshino do not concatenate.
14. Healthspan. ITP female median null; 78c female null. Late ANM splits organs. G8 closed.

8. Multiscale mechanistic synthesis

8.1 Protein: two enzymes compete; three routes coexist

NRK1. Ratajczak: mammalian cells convert NMN to NR outside the cell; NRK1 is rate-limiting for exogenous NR and NMN, dispensable for NAM/NA. Direct, V/A, extraovarian.

CD38. Camacho-Pereira: it is the principal enzyme that degrades NMN in vivo; NMN disappears fast in WT blood, not in CD38KO. NR is CD38-resistant in vitro; in vivo NR→NMN reopens the substrate. Direct, A/V, extraovarian.

NAMPT / SASP. Nacarelli: NAD inside the secreting cell feeds SASP independent of arrest. NMN 1 mM restores SASP and does not lower p16/p21. In vivo = KC pancreas and TOV21G xeno, not aging ovary.

Sauve, three routes in the same animal. Pathway 1 NAM (m/z 666); Pathway 2 NR (m/z 667); Pathway 3 intact (m/z 669, requires the phosphate). They coexist by tissue in a 10-week male. 98% of IP NAD-new is in liver+kidney. Intestine, where Slc12a8 is high, stays <1% intact: SLC12A8 is not a general gate.

8.2 Cell: the serial slogan is an extraovarian graph error, not a titled ovarian graph

Scoping H1 assumed: the cell A kills is the one that consumes NAD, and the one that remains is the one that uses B. The graph measured outside ovary is another. L10-5-MS-R1 keeps that extraovarian lesson. Adversarial review restricts transport: Isola doubles immune by census, not by NADase per cell; Sauve shows young-spleen NAM without ovarian SASP. The three-identity fork remains ovarian H0.

In ovary, Huang/Liang: B moves p16/p21/TUNEL without selective death. That is H4 of marker. Relocating the siphon to the primordial dictyate is L10-4’s category error (MS-R1 of 10.4), not a 10.5 victory.

8.3 Tissue: WAT explains the slogan; the ovary does not instantiate it; the brain contradicts it

WAT/liver: senostatic 3TC raises NAD ~4× without lowering p16; Ab68×NMN potentiates NAD, n=5. That is H5a of extraovarian mediator (L10-5-EV-R1), biased because WAT admits intact.

Natural ovary: G0-COMBO negative. García quiet function. Gao quiet structure. Bertoldo bulk does not fall with age. Huang/Liang B alone.

Brain: Scieszka anti-synergistic. Transport to ovary forbidden; the sign attacks transported H1 and favors extraovarian H3/H7.

8.4 System: women are not on the chain

G7: zero women with both arms. Farr CTx P=0.611. Yoshino muscle NAD null. Christen intact <2 µM. GV 100 µM is not an exposed woman. Krishnakumar fisetin Cmax ~0.035 µM, n=3.

G8: ITP and 78c female nulls. ANM splits bone/T2D and hormone-dependent cancer. HT1 remains parked, HUMAN_QA_REQUIRED. AMH, follicles, estrus, litter and menopause are not longevity.

Title 10.5 fuses
  ovarian senolysis     ── D+Q/fisetin H0 (García, Gao TUNEL)
  survivor NAD-new      ── kit/pool/blood; G1-NAD fails
  2×2 of one lineage    ── secreting cell ≠ siphon ≠ user (extraovarian);
                           Sauve: NAM/NR/intact by tissue, ovary absent
  animal synergy        ── WAT Ab68×NMN or brain RNMN; RNDQ anti-synergistic
  female healthspan     ── Farr, Yoshino, ITP, 78c do not concatenate; G8 closed

9. Computational layer

decision: skip. NCBI GEO, 2026-10-01: zero series (dasatinib OR quercetin OR fisetin OR senolytic) AND (NMN OR "nicotinamide mononucleotide"); zero deposit of Scieszka (PMID 40890725) or of Huang/Liang. Ovarian NMN GSEs are B alone: GSE183271 (C57BL/6JAusb, 2 g/L 4 weeks, Bertoldo’s non-monotonic breeding arm) and GSE153920 (ICR MII, n=3). Jin (GSE202601) and Isola (GSE232309) already voted CD38/NMRK1/Cd38 RNA in L9-3/L9-4. Adding NT5E or CDKN1A does not title catalysis. GSE253194 is Yan/ABT, not flavonol, not NMN. BioNeMo does not enter: there is no variant to measure, and embeddings are not isotopic fate. The smallest discriminant remains outside GEO (L10-5-CD-C1–C3).

10. Primary hypothesis

L10-5-AR-H1 v1 — D+Q/fisetin × NMN is not senolysis × NAD; the three-identity fork is not titled in ovary; clauses are voted separately

Role: operational primary. Splits L10-5-HG-H1 v1 (five-clause conjunction withdrawn). Absorbs SCOPE-H2, G0-COMBO, García, Gao. Does not confirm SCOPE-H1. Does not rank D+Q against fisetin nor NMN against NR. Does not treat Ab68 as a senolytic. Does not transport Sauve to female.

Falsifiable statement: in adult female without gonadotoxic, (i) there is not, published or in the laboratory, a 2×2 of an agent that selectively kills a state that already passed Q0-STATE and of NMN that delivers absolute NAD-new —labeled phosphate, quenched— in the unqualified lineage, at matched occupancy, with a superadditive term on an independent ovarian function; (iii) D+Q or fisetin, at documented occupancy, do not fill arm A of (i); (v) a Q×NMN term, if it appears, is not read as senolysis×NAD. Predicate (ii) —whether SASP+ CD38-low secreting cell, ecto-CD38 siphon and NRK1 user coincide in the same ovarian niche— is a separate estimand, today ovarian H0. Predicate (iv) —the measurable cross would be anti-CD38 or SASP-block × NMN— is not inherited from Chini Fig. 8h–i (WAT, n=5, tissue with minority intact).

Lineage: L10-5-HG-H1 v1 (weakened); L10-5-SCOPE-H2 v1; L10-5-MS-R1 (restricted to extraovarian); L10-5-VER-C1; L10-5-VER-C3; L10-5-VER-C6; L10-5-AR-C1; L10-5-AR-C2; L10-5-ED-C2. García PMID 38358579. Gao PMID 36648735. Sauve PMID 37446292. Scieszka PMID 40890725 (extraovarian, not a graph vote). Esearch 2026-10-02 = 0.

Predictions:

1. D0-NMN-FORK-EXPLANT: if the pulse is gavage or systemic IP without isolated ovary, immune and granulosa label NAM in parallel with blood NAM. That does not confirm (ii).
2. D+Q or fisetin at documented occupancy do not split Q0 death. Lipofuscin or p16 may fall: AR-H2(2a), not a kill of this primary.
3. A D+Q×NMN 2×2, if someone ran it, leaves the independent-function term in equivalence or inverts it. D0-2x2-INTERACTION stays closed.
4. Q×NMN is not relabelled senolysis×NAD (SCOPE-C4).
5. G8 remains closed. PubMed D/Q/fisetin × NMN × ovar* remains at zero until an ovarian factorial is published.

Evidence for (layer):

• A: García, two calendars, function does not separate. Gao, TUNEL null.
• C: ovarian esearch = 0 (2026-10-01 and 2026-10-02). GEO senolytic×NMN = 0.
• A/X: Scieszka PMID 40890725, RNDQ worse than RNMN. Extraovarian, anti-synergistic, not a graph vote.
• A/X: Sauve, ovary absent; an IP confirms Pathway 1.
• V/A, X: Ratajczak, Camacho-Pereira, Chini 2019 — extraovarian.

Evidence against:

• The ovarian fork is not measured. WAT→ovary transport is I.
• A future pair that is not D+Q/fisetin×NMN is not forbidden by (i); the conjunction “no pair will exist” is unfalsifiable H0 and was rejected.
• Huang/Liang: B alone moves the marker. If that is granulosa NAD-new without a fork split, AR-H2(2a) wins.

Kill criteria:

• Selective death of a Q0 state and phosphate+ NAD-new of the unqualified lineage, two natural replicates, documented occupancy. Then (i) and (iii) die for that A; SCOPE-H1 becomes testable for that A, not for D+Q by name.
• Isolated ovary, without blood NAM, shows immune-NAM vs follicle-NR split and NADase per a distinct cell, and an ecto-CD38 block moves user NAD. Then (ii) and (iv) are tested as an object distinct from the title; this primary restricts to “D+Q/fisetin was not A.”

Status: proposed_primary.
Maturity: H1 of literature for each arm failure and for Sauve’s metrology lesson. Ovarian H0 for the niche split. H0 for “no future pair.”
Confidence: 0.74 that D+Q/fisetin × NMN is not ovarian senolysis×NAD; 0.22 that the three-identity fork instantiates in naturally aging ovary.

11. Competing hypothesis

L10-5-AR-H2 v1 — three rivals, not an ovary that “already voted” senomorphic and siphon-free

Role: competing. Splits L10-5-HG-H2 v1. Contrary to treating the WAT diagram as a license for an ovarian siphon × precursor 2×2, and contrary to killing that possibility with Isola 9 months or Perrone.

Falsifiable statement: after setting D+Q/fisetin×NMN aside as a name, one of these three —declared before the datum— explains the residue of B and of the medium: (2a) in naturally aging female, NMN alone lowers ovarian p16 and/or p21 without Q0 death and without isotopic NAD-new in the surviving lineage (the kit and the homogenate lie about delivery); (2b) any NAM in the immune fraction after a systemic bolus is Sauve Pathway 1 (blood NAM / PNP), reproducible in young female, and disappears in isolated ovary; (2c) a niche immune-NAM vs follicle-NR split can appear and ecto-CD38 blockade, at matched immune composition, does not beat NMN alone on user NAD-new nor on independent function (Perrone is not used as the sole bridge; Yang is not averaged).

Lineage: L10-5-HG-H2 v1 (weakened); L10-5-SCOPE-H4 v1; L10-5-SCOPE-H6 v1; Sauve PMID 37446292; Huang PMID 34801690; Liang PMID 39355508; Isola PMID 38200272; Perrone PMID 37822499; L9-4-K1; L10-5-ED-C3.

Predictions:

1. D0-NMN-FORK-EXPLANT, isolated ovary: (2a) p16/p21 fall if the design includes chronic B, without split or NADase — a 2 h pulse does not vote (2a); (2b) the systemic split dissolves; (2c) the niche split, if it exists, does not translate into a user-NAD term when ecto-CD38 is blocked.
2. D0-ROUTE-POS (IP n=4, same lot): ovarian NAM correlates with blood NAM. If the explant split and the IP unifies to NAM, (2b) lives for the systemic route.
3. Matching immune fraction cancels kit-NAD differences attributed to siphon. If NAD-new per surviving cell survives that matching and depends on CD38, (2c) dies and AR-H1(iv) is tested.
4. Relocating the siphon to primordial dictyate is a category failure (L10-4), not a victory.
5. Shen/Ramírez are alkylator t_pre or concurrent. They do not count as (2a) of the natural estimand.
6. 9 months (Isola) is the first old only if step 1 delivered NAD-new and did not kill (2b) by a young split. Huang’s 60 weeks is not the first old.

Kill of (2a): phosphate+ NAD-new in granulosa/oocyte with quiet p16/p21, or A shows Q0 death and B does not move the marker without A.
Kill of (2b): explant, medium NAM not dominant, preserves immune→NAM vs follicle→NR with Δ≥25 pp.
Kill of (2c): ecto-CD38 × NMN, matched composition, measured occlusion ≥80%, increases user NAD-new beyond a written margin.

Status: proposed_competing.
Maturity: H1 of literature for the marker sign (Huang fragment + Liang body, opaque n). Extraovarian H1 for systemic NAM (Sauve). H0 for ovarian Ab68×NMN equivalence and for function. Human H0.
Confidence: 0.48 in (2a); 0.41 in (2b) as first confounder of the pulse; 0.24 in (2c).

12. Translational hypothesis

L10-5-AR-HT1 v1 — the no-concatenate rule includes not nesting blood NAD as B and as panel

Role: translational. Splits L10-5-HG-HT1 v1. HUMAN_QA_REQUIRED. Not a biomarker. Not a product. Not 10.6.

Falsifiable statement (design rule, already in force): in adult women classified by STRAW+10, outside any user cohort, a parameter made of Farr CTx/P1NP, Yoshino clamp, whole-blood or PBMC NAD, circulating intact <2 µM, fisetin or quercetin Cmax, ITP median, AMH, AFC, menstrual regularity, age at menopause, or a product called senolytic×NMN that uses blood NAD at once as exposure and as covariate, will not be accepted as mediator of an organ event. AMH, by Weenen 2004, is labelled growing pool if it ever enters, not primordial endowment.

Empirical form (parked): none of those surrogates is run until AR-H1 or AR-H2 deliver an object. The comparator, if that object exists, is STRAW stage + systemic inflammation ± a histological or primordial census named as such, without blood NAD as B arm, with competing risks. Beating blood NAD is tautological. Beating STRAW and not the organ event is stage, not synergy.

Lineage: L10-5-HG-HT1 v1; L10-5-AR-C4; Weenen PMID 14742691; Farr PMID 38956196; Yoshino PMID 33888596; Christen PMID 41540253; Harrison PMID 38041783; L9-3-K3; L10-1-K10; L10-5-ED-C6.

Kill of the rule: H5 or biomarker is marked, or Farr/Yoshino/AMH/ITP is used as an ovarian combo effect.
Kill of the empirical (when an object exists): STRAW-stratified ovarian NAD-new of surviving lineage beats stage + systemic inflammation out of sample for an organ event.

Status: proposed, parked for human execution.
Maturity: H0. HUMAN_QA_REQUIRED. It is not H5.
Confidence: 0.73 in the rule; 0.08 in the complete empirical form.

13. Falsifiable predictions and kill criteria

14. Discriminating experiment

No new senolytic. No clinical bolus. Research, not a regimen for a woman. Not executed in this stage.

D0-SAUVE-ORGAN-LIST — desktop, already run

Sauve 2023, PMC10342116, methods: liver, kidney, pancreas, brain, quadriceps, spleen, lung, heart, stomach, epididymal WAT, BAT, peritoneum, intestine and carcass. There is no ovary. The authors chose young males “to minimize hormonal variation” and declare that the finding does not transport to females or to another age (L10-5-ED-C2).

D0-NMN-FORK-EXPLANT — the only pulse that can kill (2b)

C57BL/6J females, 10 weeks, n = 8, unit = female. One ovary to isotopic explant → Bafor dissociation → sort CD45+ vs FOXL2+ vs rest. No pool. Estrus is recorded, not used to exclude. Triple-isotopic NMN [18O-phosphoryl-18O-carbonyl-13C-1-ribosyl], 2 h, quench ≤30 s. Concentration titrated first in 2–3 discard females: detectable NAD-new in ≥ one fraction without saturating the three routes to the same proportion. 500 mg/kg and 500 µM × 17 h are not copied. Medium NAM/NR/NMN/NAD at 0 and 2 h. Spleen of the same female as assay control.

Primary estimand: paired difference in NAM fraction (m/z 666 / NAD-new) between CD45+ and FOXL2+. Minimum kill of (2b) that is not a kidney-vs-spleen split: +25 percentage points with SD of the difference = 20 pp. n=3 (Sauve) power ≈0.24; n=8 power ≈0.86 (df=7, critical t=2.365). A p>0.05 is not estimable for split, not “there is no fork” (L10-5-ED-C7). Floor: ≥500 CD45+ and ≥500 FOXL2+ viable per female.

d4-NMN 17 h in COC (Mihalas 2026, preprint) does not enter (L10-5-ED-C4). Homogenate + NAD kit (Liang) does not enter.

Later steps, not first

• D0-ROUTE-POS: n=4 females 10 wk, IP 500 mg/kg of the same lot, 2 h, blood NAM + ovary. Positive control of (2b). Never a substitute for the explant.
• D0-NMN-FORK-AGED: 9 months (Isola), n=8, only if step 1 delivered NAD-new and did not kill (2b) by a young split. Huang’s 60 weeks is not the first old.
• D0-NADASE-CELL: activity per viable cell, same female. CD38×CDKN1A RNA does not enter.
• D0-ECTO-BLOCK: 2×2 within female, only if there is a niche split. Measured occlusion ≥80%. Ab68 5 mg/kg is not copied into the bath. AOPCP is titrated. Q does not enter. This 2×2 is not the title’s.

D0-2x2-INTERACTION — remains closed

Opens only if H2 died: Q0 death and phosphate+ NAD-new of the unqualified lineage, documented occupancy, two natural replicates. If D0-ECTO-BLOCK kills (2c), the future 2×2 is siphon or SASP block × NMN, with obligatory Q×B arm and named order A→B vs B→A. Combining D+Q+NMN now remains theatre.

D0-SAUVE-ORGAN-LIST (ovary absent)
        ↓
D0-NMN-FORK-EXPLANT  10 weeks, n=8, phosphate, 2 h
        ↓
   NAD-new in ovary?
        no, spleen yes → ovarian STOP (H2-B). No 2×2.
        no, spleen no → assay. Retitrate.
        yes, no split → D0-NMN-FORK-AGED (9 months)
        yes, with split → D0-NADASE-CELL + D0-ECTO-BLOCK
        ↓
   Does (2c) die?
        no → the title has no rewritable A.
        yes → future 2×2 = ecto-CD38/SASP × NMN, not D+Q×NMN.

15. Biomarkers and stratification

There is no validated biomarker. The following are research readouts, not biomarkers:

• Absolute NAD-new —labeled phosphate, quenched— in the unqualified lineage: object of G1-NAD and of AR-H2(2a), not a clinical analyte.
• NAM/NR/intact fraction (m/z 666 / 667 / 669) between CD45+ and FOXL2+ of the same female: object of D0-NMN-FORK-EXPLANT, not a menopause panel.
• Measured ecto-CD38 occlusion ≥80%, if D0-ECTO-BLOCK opens: probe occupancy, not an indication.
• STRAW+10: minimum human stratification, not a criterion of a trial this report does not authorize.
• Histological primordial census named as such: comparator of AR-HT1 if an object ever exists. AMH/AFC do not occupy that arm (Weenen 2004). Blood NAD does not enter as B nor as nested covariate.

p16/p21, SA-β-gal, colorimetric kit, whole-blood or PBMC NAD, circulating intact <2 µM, AMH, AFC, menstrual regularity, age at menopause, Farr CTx, Yoshino clamp and fisetin or quercetin Cmax cannot be presented as a single biomarker of senolytic×NMN synergy, ovarian health or longevity.

16. Individual variability

Expected heterogeneity includes strain (C57BL/6J vs Sauve’s C57BL/6N), age (explant 10 weeks vs Isola 9 months vs Huang 60 weeks), estrus (Bafor: changes T; recorded, not used to exclude), immune composition (Isola: fraction ×2 at 9 months), FOXL2+ vs CD45+ yield, and —in humans— STRAW+10, not age alone. Human studies must distinguish:

• natural transition versus gonadotoxic injury (Shen, Ramírez-Martín, Stringer);
• ovary with follicles versus postmenopause;
• local action versus a brain 4-arm (Scieszka) or a WAT boost (Chini n=5);
• organ response versus blood NAD or ITP median;
• sex: Sauve is male; Covarrubias eWAT NAD is male; Fang already showed dimorphism under D+Q.

Participation of women is not equivalent to estimating modification by stage (L9-3-K9). Farr’s sixty postmenopausal women without ovary and without NMN do not estimate STRAW −2. Yoshino’s twenty-five do not estimate ovarian NAD. Krishnakumar’s three volunteers (Cmax ~0.035 µM) do not estimate ovarian occupancy.

17. Pharma relevance and maturity

There is no nominated target of ovarian senolysis × NAD synergy. There is no combo modality. There is no indication in women’s health. There is no STRAW stratum that this report authorizes. Maturity does not reach H5. HUMAN_QA_REQUIRED before any partnering conversation (L10-5-ED-C6).

Negative opportunity and conditional surveillance:

1. D+Q or fisetin + NMN combo. Two arm H0s plus G0-COMBO = 0 this turn. The only female 4-arm is brain, resveratrol, Q=10 mg/kg, anti-synergistic. There is no combination asset this line can take to a committee.
2. Ecto-CD38 (Ab68 / 78c / clinical CD38 antibodies). The extraovarian Ab68×NMN cross exists in WAT, n=5, no superadditivity test, in the tissue where Sauve saw intact 3–10%. Hematologic dual-use. 78c did not extend survival in 15 females (L9-4-K9). Ovary: H0 until D0-ECTO-BLOCK kills (2c). Not marked ovarian candidate.
3. NMN as precursor. Blood ≠ tissue (L9-3-K3). Yoshino clamp without muscle NAD. Circulating intact <2 µM. An NMN supplement is not ovarian arm B of this title.
4. BCL2/SRC senolytics. Dasatinib has approved oncology use; that does not make it ovarian A. Navitoclax is dual-use. Flavonols remain H0 of ovarian senolysis.

H5 is not marked. Nothing is prescribed.

18. Limitations

1. The explant was not run. A design is not an m/z.
2. Sauve is 10-week male C57BL/6N; step 1 is female C57BL/6J. The lesson is metrological, not a transported percentage.
3. Power 0.86 at n=8 assumes paired SD = 20 pp. If the real split is noisier (sort, estrus, FOXL2 mass), n=8 does not reach +25 pp. A non-significant remains not estimable.
4. Huang n/group remains absent. 0.5 mg/mL is not G1-NAD. Blogs are discarded.
5. Liang counts sections; young/old P21 wording inverted (VER-C5).
6. Bafor maximizes immune; it can bias composition. FOXL2+ is not measured “NRK1 user.”
7. AOPCP is not 100% CD73-specific. Sociali OVCAR-3 is not aging granulosa.
8. Mihalas 2026 is a preprint. It is not used as ovarian delivery of intact NMN.
9. Scieszka Jaccard is not transported. FST is not the 4-arm. Two RNDQ deaths, cause unclear, are not demonstrated toxicity.
10. Chini 8h–i n=5, mixed sex unpublished in the split, 22-month kinetics male-only.
11. Covarrubias eWAT NAD is male. Perrone and Yang are not averaged.
12. Nacarelli in vivo is not reproductive female.
13. p>0.05 does not establish equivalence; several “nulls” may be imprecise.
14. Animal data do not authorize dose or intervention in people.
15. The bridge to longevity has no measured event, mediation or competing risks.
16. This report does not use user data. It proposes no product, personas or copy.

19. Conclusions

“Senolytics + NAD+ (NMN): proposed synergy” names a 2×2 that ovarian literature does not deliver and a three-identity graph the ovary has not titled. What it delivers is a candidate senolytic null of function (García) and TUNEL anti-senotype (Gao); a precursor that lowers p16/p21 without isotope (Huang hollow n, Liang sections); a WAT anti-CD38 × NMN axis (Chini n=5, tissue with intact); an anti-synergistic brain 4-arm with resveratrol (Scieszka PMID 40890725); and a tissue-fate map in young male that did not harvest ovary (Sauve). PubMed, on the day of this report, remains at zero ovarian factorial.

The hypotheses that can be falsified now are not a stack for women. They are AR-H1 (D+Q/fisetin × NMN is not senolysis × NAD; the fork is not titled in ovary; clauses are voted separately), AR-H2 (marker without NAD-new / systemic NAM / niche split that does not add function —voted separately), and AR-HT1 (organ mediation with Farr, Yoshino, Christen, ITP, AMH or a product that nests blood NAD is not accepted). The smallest discriminant is not another gavage: it is a 2 h explant with labeled phosphate in young female, n that can see a +25 pp split, fractions from the same female, and IP relegated to blood-NAM control. Women’s longevity is not at stake in any of those endpoints.

20. References

1. Scieszka D, Hulse M, Gu H, Campen MJ, et al. Neurometabolomic impacts of wood smoke and protective benefits of anti-aging therapeutics in aged female C57BL/6J mice. Part Fibre Toxicol. 2025;22:23. DOI: 10.1186/s12989-025-00639-4. PMID: 40890725. PMC12400709. Journal, not preprint PMID 40166007/PMC11957201. Body audited 2026-10-01; record reconfirmed 2026-10-02.
2. Sauve AA, Wang Q, Zhang N, Kang S, Rathmann A, Yang Y. Triple-Isotope Tracing for Pathway Discernment of NMN-Induced NAD+ Biosynthesis in Whole Mice. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24(13):11114. DOI: 10.3390/ijms241311114. PMID: 37446292. PMC10342116. Male C57BL/6N 10 weeks; n=3–4; 500 mg/kg IP or gavage; phosphate-18O; organ list without ovary. Body 2026-10-02.
3. Ratajczak J, Joffraud M, Trammell SA, et al. NRK1 controls nicotinamide mononucleotide and nicotinamide riboside metabolism in mammalian cells. Nat Commun. 2016;7:13103. DOI: 10.1038/ncomms13103. PMID: 27725675.
4. Camacho-Pereira J, Tarragó MG, Chini CCS, et al. CD38 Dictates Age-Related NAD Decline and Mitochondrial Dysfunction through an SIRT3-Dependent Mechanism. Cell Metab. 2016;23(6):1127–1139. DOI: 10.1016/j.cmet.2016.05.006. PMID: 27304511. PMC4911708.
5. Chini C, Hogan KA, Warner GM, et al. The NADase CD38 is induced by factors secreted from senescent cells providing a potential link between senescence and age-related cellular NAD+ decline. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2019;513(2):486–493. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2019.03.199. PMID: 30975470.
6. Chini CCS, Peclat TR, Warner GM, et al. CD38 ecto-enzyme in immune cells is induced during aging and regulates NAD+ and NMN levels. Nat Metab. 2020;2:1284–1304. DOI: 10.1038/s42255-020-00298-z. PMID: 33199925. PMC8752031. Fig. 8h–i n=5; no superadditivity; zero ovary.
7. Covarrubias AJ, Kale A, Perrone R, et al. Senescent cells promote tissue NAD+ decline during ageing via the activation of CD38+ macrophages. Nat Metab. 2020;2:1265–1283. DOI: 10.1038/s42255-020-00305-3. PMID: 33199924. PMC7908681. eWAT NAD male; p16-3MR, not INK-ATTAC.
8. Nacarelli T, Lau L, Fukumoto T, et al. NAD+ metabolism governs the proinflammatory senescence-associated secretome. Nat Cell Biol. 2019;21:397–407. DOI: 10.1038/s41556-019-0287-4. PMID: 30778219. PMC6448588.
9. Huang P, Zhou Y, Tang W, et al. Long-term treatment of Nicotinamide mononucleotide improved age-related diminished ovary reserve through enhancing the mitophagy level of granulosa cells in mice. J Nutr Biochem. 2022;101:108911. DOI: 10.1016/j.jnutbio.2021.108911. PMID: 34801690. No PMC. n/group absent. ScienceDirect fragment: 0.5 mg/mL × 20 weeks from 40 weeks. Not G1-NAD.
10. Liang J, Huang F, Hao X, Zhang P, Chen R. Nicotinamide mononucleotide supplementation rescues mitochondrial and energy metabolism functions and ameliorates inflammatory states in the ovaries of aging mice. MedComm. 2024;5:e727. DOI: 10.1002/mco2.727. PMID: 39355508. PMC11442848.
11. Bertoldo MJ, Listijono DR, Ho WHJ, et al. NAD+ repletion rescues female fertility during reproductive aging. Cell Rep. 2020;30:1670–1681.e7. DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2020.01.058. PMID: 32049001. GEO GSE183271 = 2 g/L.
12. Miao Y, Cui Z, Gao Q, Rui R, Xiong B. Nicotinamide mononucleotide supplementation reverses the declining quality of maternally aged oocytes. Cell Rep. 2020;32:107987. DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2020.107987. PMID: 32755581.
13. García DN, et al. Study of D+Q/fisetin, ovarian reserve and fertility in C57BL/6 females. GeroScience. 2024. DOI: 10.1007/s11357-024-01089-0. PMID: 38358579.
14. Gao Y, et al. Increased cellular senescence in doxorubicin-induced murine ovarian injury: effect of senolytics. GeroScience. 2023;45:1775–1790. DOI: 10.1007/s11357-023-00728-2. PMID: 36648735.
15. Shen L, et al. Nicotinamide mononucleotide protects ovarian function and oocyte developmental competence during chemotherapy. J Ovarian Res. 2025;18:193. DOI: 10.1186/s13048-025-01782-4. PMID: 40849491. PMC12374331. Three arms; no NMN alone.
16. Ramírez-Martín N, Buigues A, Herraiz S, et al. Study CTX+busulfan ± NMN and human GV 100 µM. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2025;233:112.e1–20. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2025.02.006. PMID: 39923879. Not PMID 40849491.
17. Stringer JM, Winship AL, et al. NMN does not prevent primordial loss under CTX/IR. Reproduction. 2020. PMID: 31751296.
18. Isola JVV, Ocañas SR, Hubbart CR, et al. A single-cell atlas of the aging mouse ovary. Nat Aging. 2024;4:145–162. DOI: 10.1038/s43587-023-00552-5. PMID: 38200272. Immune fraction ×2 at 9 months.
19. Bafor EE, Martin T, Carrell J, et al. Isolation of single cells from individual mouse ovaries for flow cytometry and functional analysis. STAR Protoc. 2023;4(4):102710. DOI: 10.1016/j.xpro.2023.102710. PMID: 37963022. PMC10679862.
20. Yoshino M, Yoshino J, Kayser BD, et al. Nicotinamide mononucleotide increases muscle insulin sensitivity in prediabetic women. Science. 2021. DOI: 10.1126/science.abe9985. PMID: 33888596.
21. Farr JN, Atkinson EJ, Achenbach SJ, et al. Effects of intermittent senolytic therapy on bone metabolism in postmenopausal women: a phase 2 randomized controlled trial. Nat Med. 2024;30:2605–2612. DOI: 10.1038/s41591-024-03096-2. PMID: 38956196. n=60; CTx P=0.611.
22. Christen S, et al. Open-label trial NR vs NMN vs NAM vs placebo. Nat Metab. 2026. DOI: 10.1038/s42255-025-01421-8. PMID: 41540253. Intact <2 µM.
23. Harrison DE, Strong R, Reifsnyder P, et al. ITP; fisetin from 20 months. Geroscience. 2024. DOI: 10.1007/s11357-023-01011-0. PMID: 38041783.
24. Fang Y, et al. D+Q vs fisetin in C57BL/6, sexes separate; ovary not measured. GeroScience. 2023. DOI: 10.1007/s11357-023-00843-0. PMID: 37296266.
25. Weenen C, Laven JS, et al., Themmen AP. Anti-Müllerian hormone expression pattern in the human ovary. Mol Hum Reprod. 2004;10(2):77–83. DOI: 10.1093/molehr/gah015. PMID: 14742691.
26. Escande C, et al. Quercetin IC50 vs CD38 ~14 µM. Diabetes. 2013. PMID: 23172919.
27. Peclat TR, et al. 78c: pooled survival +9%; females without benefit. Geroscience. 2022. PMID: 35263032.
28. Perrone R, et al. CD38 KO: fecund advantage does not persist if bred late. 2023. PMID: 37822499.
29. Krishnakumar IM, et al. Fisetin PK; 3 women; aglycone Cmax ~0.035 µM; no ovary. J Nutr Sci. 2022. PMID: 36304817.
30. Bhattarai S, et al. α,β-Methylene-ADP (AOPCP) Derivatives and Analogues. J Med Chem. 2015. PMID: 26147331. CD73 probe; not an ovarian dose.
31. Du et al. D+Q one week before cisplatin. 2022. PMID: 35693700.
32. Xu et al. D+Q hours before cyclophosphamide. Int J Mol Sci. 2023. PMID: 38139022.
33. Li J, et al. Quercetin before CTX; PI3K–FOXO3A brake. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2021. PMID: 33892727.
34. Yan H, Diaz Miranda EA, Jin S, et al. Primary oocytes with traits called senescent. Sci Rep. 2024. PMID: 38871781. Inherited L10-4; not a combo.
35. Jin et al. Single-cell atlas of human ovarian aging. Nat Aging. 2025. PMID: 39578560. GSE202601. RNA does not title the fork.
36. Coppé JP, Rodier F, Patil CK, et al. p16 induces arrest without SASP. J Biol Chem. 2011. PMID: 21772226.
37. Mihalas BP, Lin D, Bustamante S, et al., Bertoldo MJ, Wu LE, Gilchrist RB. Aging disrupts cumulus–oocyte NAD+ homeostasis. bioRxiv. 23 Jul 2026. DOI: 10.64898/2026.07.22.739977. Preprint. d4-NMN 500 µM × 17 h in COC. No phosphate. Not D0-NMN-FORK.
38. Wisetmongkolchai et al. Oral quercetin 30 mg/kg ×21 d, 32–40 weeks: oocytes/fertilization nulls. 2026. PMID: 42330175.
39. Ruth KS, et al. Age at natural menopause: bone/T2D vs hormone-dependent cancer. Nature. 2021. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-021-03779-7.
40. PubMed eutils esearch, 2026-10-02 (this turn): (dasatinib OR fisetin OR quercetin) AND (NMN OR "nicotinamide mononucleotide") AND (ovar* OR oocyte OR granulosa) = 0. G0-COMBO does not reopen.

Claims added in REPORT_EN: L10-5-REPORT-EN-C1.

Hypotheses touched: L10-5-AR-H1 v1, L10-5-AR-H2 v1, L10-5-AR-HT1 v1, L10-5-HG-H1 v1, L10-5-HG-H2 v1, L10-5-HG-HT1 v1, L10-5-SCOPE-H1 v1, L10-5-SCOPE-H2 v1, L10-5-MS-R1, L10-5-EV-R1, D0-NMN-FORK.

This report is scientific and does not constitute medical advice, prescription or authorization to use dasatinib, quercetin, fisetin, navitoclax, NMN, NR, 78c, Ab68 or their combination. It is not written into memoria agentes/Lua Labs/reportes/. Promotion of the final report occurs only after QA.