Are all adaptogens created equal? A comparative review and trend analysis of clinical data
Abstract
IntroductionThe use of adaptogenic ingredients in dietary supplements and herbal medicines is increasingly common. The pharmacological effects of generally acknowledged adaptogens at tissue and cellular levels through various mechanisms result in a range of clinically relevant effects, such as increasing resilience during the stress response, supporting more rapid recovery from stressors, and decreasing the intensity of post-stress exhaustion. While clinical effects for adaptogens should be non-specific, traditional use and commercial marketing suggest different applications for individual adaptogens. To this end, the authors conducted a comparative review of clinical research to test the hypothesis based on traditional understanding that adaptogen-specific effect profiles exist and that adaptogens have differentiable clinical relevance.MethodsA comparative trend analysis of clinical evidence using accepted vote-counting methodology and data synthesis was conducted on seven generally acknowledged adaptogens: ashwagandha (Withania somnifera), schisandra (Schisandra spp.), eleuthero (Eleutherococcus senticosus), rhodiola (Rhodiola rosea), Asian ginseng (Panax ginseng), reishi (species of Ganoderma), and cordyceps (species of Cordyceps and Ophiocordyceps along with affiliated Paecilomyces hepiali).ResultsA total of 275 clinical studies were included and scored based on primary and secondary outcomes across seven clinical outcome domains: energy, cognition, mood, sleep, immunologic and inflammatory balance, cardiometabolic health, and the reproductive system. Trend analysis of this dataset identified which adaptogens showed significant positive directions of effect in each domain, and demonstrated some significant differences in clinical outcome distribution profiles for each adaptogen.DiscussionIndividual adaptogens show unique effect profiles measured by the outcomes of clinical research in diverse domains, corroborated by traditional use.
Related
- Problematic gaming in occasional, low, intermediate or heavy use gamers – not all screen time is created equal – A reanalysis
- Comparative and synergistic effects of digital devices and Child Life services in pediatric clinical practice: a systematic review
- OP–133 Not all mutations are equal: distinct clinical manifestations across fmf genotypes in azerbaijani pediatric patients
- Early mobility to improVE health outcomes following cardiac surgery (EVE) clinical trial development: findings from workshop 2-co-created definition and prioritized barriers, facilitators and outcome and experience measures.
- Time Course and Comparative Risk of Hypophosphatemia After Ferric Carboxymaltose versus Ferric Derisomaltose: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Clinical Cost Considerations
BibTeX
@article{mase2026adaptogens,
title = {{Are all adaptogens created equal? A comparative review and trend analysis of clinical data}},
author = {Guido Masé and Aaron Jenks and Marisa Williams and Thomas Brendler},
journal = {Frontiers in Pharmacology},
year = {2026},
month = nov,
doi = {10.3389/fphar.2026.1980715},
url = {https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphar.2026.1980715},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Are all adaptogens created equal? A comparative review and trend analysis of clinical data
AU - Guido Masé
AU - Aaron Jenks
AU - Marisa Williams
AU - Thomas Brendler
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/11/09
JO - Frontiers in Pharmacology
DO - 10.3389/fphar.2026.1980715
UR - https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphar.2026.1980715
AB - IntroductionThe use of adaptogenic ingredients in dietary supplements and herbal medicines is increasingly common. The pharmacological effects of generally acknowledged adaptogens at tissue and cellular levels through various mechanisms result in a range of clinically relevant effects, such as increasing resilience during the stress response, supporting more rapid recovery from stressors, and decreasing the intensity of post-stress exhaustion. While clinical effects for adaptogens should be non-specific, traditional use and commercial marketing suggest different applications for individual adaptogens. To this end, the authors conducted a comparative review of clinical research to test the hypothesis based on traditional understanding that adaptogen-specific effect profiles exist and that adaptogens have differentiable clinical relevance.MethodsA comparative trend analysis of clinical evidence using accepted vote-counting methodology and data synthesis was conducted on seven generally acknowledged adaptogens: ashwagandha (Withania somnifera), schisandra (Schisandra spp.), eleuthero (Eleutherococcus senticosus), rhodiola (Rhodiola rosea), Asian ginseng (Panax ginseng), reishi (species of Ganoderma), and cordyceps (species of Cordyceps and Ophiocordyceps along with affiliated Paecilomyces hepiali).ResultsA total of 275 clinical studies were included and scored based on primary and secondary outcomes across seven clinical outcome domains: energy, cognition, mood, sleep, immunologic and inflammatory balance, cardiometabolic health, and the reproductive system. Trend analysis of this dataset identified which adaptogens showed significant positive directions of effect in each domain, and demonstrated some significant differences in clinical outcome distribution profiles for each adaptogen.DiscussionIndividual adaptogens show unique effect profiles measured by the outcomes of clinical research in diverse domains, corroborated by traditional use.
SN - 1663-9812
ER -