What randomized clinical trials exist for phosphatidylserine and memory in older adults?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Randomized clinical trials of phosphatidylserine (PS) in older adults exist but are few, small, and heterogeneous: early trials using bovine-cortex PS reported short-term cognitive benefits in age-associated memory impairment and Alzheimer’s disease, later trials tested soybean-derived or PS combined with omega‑3s or other ingredients, and recent randomized, placebo‑controlled trials continue to show modest, domain‑specific effects such as improved short‑term memory in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]. Systematic reviews flag promising signals but stress important limitations — variable PS sources/doses, short durations, and mixed study quality — that prevent definitive clinical recommendations [6] [7] [8].
1. Classic randomized trials that shaped the field
A landmark randomized, double‑blind, placebo‑controlled trial in 1991 treated 149 patients meeting criteria for age‑associated memory impairment (AAMI) with bovine‑cortex PS (100 mg three times daily) for 12 weeks and reported improvements on learning and memory performance tests versus placebo, with the largest effects in participants who had lower baseline performance [1] [9]. Earlier multicenter and controlled trials in the late 1980s and 1990s likewise used bovine‑derived PS and reported cognitive benefits in elderly patients with intellectual deterioration or early dementia, forming the foundation for claims of PS efficacy [10] [2].
2. Transition from bovine to plant‑derived PS and pilot RCTs
Because bovine brain PS fell out of favor over safety concerns, investigators tested soybean‑derived PS (Soy‑PS) and PS preparations combined with omega‑3 fatty acids; a randomized, double‑blind, placebo‑controlled study in elderly Japanese subjects with memory complaints examined Soy‑PS at 300 mg/day and reported memory improvements after 12 weeks, offering a non‑bovine alternative that replicated some earlier findings [3]. Several small pilot randomized or exploratory trials of PS-containing formulations (including PS plus omega‑3s) in non‑demented older adults also reported modest gains in memory domains, though many were underpowered or open‑label [11] [12].
3. Recent randomized trials: MCI and combination supplements
Renewed RCT activity includes a large randomized double‑blind trial in Tianjin, China (n=190) testing a food supplement containing PS and α‑linolenic acid (ALA) in older adults with mild cognitive impairment; investigators reported improvement in short‑term memory and suggested serum ALA increases may mediate the effect [4] [5]. Other randomized, placebo‑controlled trials have evaluated PS as part of multi‑ingredient products — for example, a 2023 trial tested a coffee‑cherry extract plus PS formulation in adults with self‑perceived memory problems and contributes to the evidence base that many PS trials involve combination products rather than PS alone [12].
4. What systematic reviews and expert summaries conclude
A recent systematic review and meta‑analysis summarized randomized trials and nonrandomized studies, finding some potential benefit of PS on memory but emphasizing difficulty in cross‑study comparison because of heterogeneity in PS source (bovine vs plant), composition (with or without omega‑3s), dosing, and trial quality; reviewers call for larger, long‑duration randomized trials using standardized PS formulations to clarify efficacy [6] [8]. The Alzheimer’s Drug Discovery Foundation likewise notes modest, inconsistent improvements across small RCTs and highlights that most trials lasted less than six months, limiting conclusions about long‑term benefit [7].
5. Limitations, conflicts and what remains unknown
Trial heterogeneity is the principal limitation: many positive RCTs used bovine‑derived PS (now largely unavailable), others used Soy‑PS or PS combined with omega‑3s, and doses and durations vary (some common regimens: 300 mg/day for 12 weeks) — factors that confound attribution of benefit solely to PS [1] [3] [8]. Several trials were small or industry‑sponsored or tested multi‑ingredient formulas, raising potential for commercial bias and limiting generalizability; long‑term safety and efficacy beyond a few months remain inadequately studied according to reviews [12] [7] [8]. Where claims extend to “de‑aging” effects or large clinical improvements, the primary trial evidence is small and should be interpreted cautiously [13].
6. Bottom line for clinicians and researchers
Randomized controlled trials — from the 1980s/1990s bovine‑PS RCTs to more recent Soy‑PS and PS‑containing supplement trials — consistently report modest, sometimes domain‑specific cognitive benefits (notably short‑term memory) in older adults, especially over short follow‑up periods, but heterogeneity in formulations, small sample sizes, and variable trial quality prevent a definitive recommendation for routine clinical use; high‑quality, longer randomized trials of standardized PS preparations are needed [1] [3] [4] [6] [8].