Researchers led by the Texas A&M College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences (VMBS) have received $7 million from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to expand a clinical trial studying rapamycin’s ability to extend the lives of companion dogs as part of The Dog Aging Project (DAP).
The DAP is a collaborative, community scientist-driven, data-gathering research project that launched in 2019 as a joint effort between the University of Washington School of Medicine and Texas A&M, with other collaborating institutions. It enrolls companion dogs from all backgrounds to study the effects of aging and gain a better understanding of what contributes to a long and healthy canine life, which also helps to expand medical knowledge surrounding human aging. To date, more than 50,000 dogs have been enrolled in the study.
Test of Rapamycin In Aging Dogs (TRIAD) is the third DAP clinical trial involving rapamycin, a generic drug that has long been used as an immunosuppressant during organ transplants in people. Previous DAP studies have shown that in small doses, the drug appears to improve cardiac function in dogs.
To enroll in either the DAP or TRIAD, owners can visit the DAP’s website. Owners interested in TRIAD can take a preliminary “fast track” survey to find out if their dog is likely to be accepted to the TRIAD study.
The Dog Aging Project, the first large-scale, longitudinal study of large animals in a natural environment, suggests that low doses of rapamycin could increase dogs’ lifespan, improving both their heart and cognitive functions by regulating cell growth and metabolism.
“Our study is light years ahead of anything that’s been done on humans or can be done on humans,” said Daniel Promislow, a biogerontologist at the University of Washington and a co-director of the project. “What we’re doing is the equivalent of a 40-year-long study on humans, testing the ability of a drug to increase healthy lifespan.”
Kate Creevy, co-founder and chief veterinary officer of the project, said they were in the unique position of being able to split their findings not just by male and female dogs – but also pre- and post-spaying, or surgical sterilisation.
“This means that our research could have interesting translational impacts for women pre- and post-menopause,” said Creevy. “We also have data on what age dogs have been spayed – which could cross over to the variation in age that women have their menopause – and data on why they were spayed, which could cross over to women who have had hysterectomies for medical reasons.”
I haven’t been able to find any protections on when the Dog Aging Project’s rapamycin cohort will produce interim results and final results.
I’ve been taking rapamycin weekly for a year and a half, but I would be heavily/negatively influenced if this project didn’t produce favorable results.
For me, this project constitutes a significant “go, no go” moment in my journey with rapamycin.
Everything I’ve seen is vague. They basically seem to be saying that it will be ready when it’s ready. Surely they can give some kind of ball park estimate!
Matt K. told me that he expected some early results in 2026 but that was the thinking prior to the NIA pulling funding on the project last year. I have no idea how the cessation of funding, and now the refunding of the effort, has impacted the schedule.
Given that we have the positive results in monkey, which are evolutionarily much closer to humans, I think the dog study is less important now (though still very interesting).
My understanding was that the marmoset study had a relativity small number of participants and the marmosets were locked up in a lab.
I like the dog study because it has a larger sample, the dogs are genetically diverse and they will likely be experiencing a wide range of physical activity.
I’ve particularly concerned about the last point, “physical activity”.
So far, the rapamycin studies have all been conducted on the animal equivalent of a couch-potatoes.
I worry that mtor1 regulation with rapamycin might be an analog for exercise and may only benefit people who are sedentary, like lab mice and lab marmosets.
We’ve already seen a comperable phenomena with metformin. In that case, Type 2 Diabetics seem to experience a longevity benefit, but people with healthy metabolisms/diets don’t seem to experience any worthwhile effect.
Unless I’m missing something, the Dog Aging Project is the only study in large mammals that comes close to measuring the benefit for the types of people likely to follow this forum.
I’m guessing the average longevity enthusiast is in the upper range of fitness and lifestyle. We’re more likely to live like a domestic dog, enjoying regular walks, portion control and regular visits to the vet.
Yes - 66 Marmosets or so I think. The paper hasn’t come out yet, so I don’t know the details. I don’t think marmosets are bred like mice, so I believe some significant genetic diversity in the group.
Its an interesting question regarding the level of physical activity of the monkeys. I’m not sure how large the cages are, and the level of activity that you naturally see in these species. When the paper comes out, this could be an area we can ask Adam Salmon more about.
But I’m not super confident that American dogs are going to be a whole lot different than the typical humans (average American exercise regimen) or the monkeys.
When I go out walking my dog, it seems most dogs mirror the eating and exercise habits of their owners. So I’m not sure we’ll really get the data we’d like to see - which is on a dog cohort that is very well exercised, fed a very healthy diet, and rapamycin (vs. just the well exercised and fed cohort).
The average American dog probably gets more exercise than the average American. Owning a dog forces people to go for walks more than most ordinary Americans.
Three average dog almost certainly gets more exercise than a lab animal, unless the lab animal is specifically made to exercise.
My understanding is that the dog study is powered to detect a 10% benefit.
If even some of the dogs are getting a decent amount of exercise and rapamycin is an analog for exercise, the result will probably be less than 10% and the study will be inconclusive.
Let me put it this way. If the dog study is inconclusive I will probably stop taking rapamycin, since I exercise every day.
Matt had clearly hinted at positive interim data from this project in his interviews but he was noncommittal as of course he should be. But if you listen closely it’s clear which way the wind is blowing.
