Senolytics kill senescent cells. Killing is the easy part. The cellular debris must be cleared through efferocytosis—a process that requires energy, functional macrophages, and time. This article examines why senolytic therapy produces variable results across clinical trials and individual patients, and how sequential preparation transforms outcomes. Unprepared tissues cannot handle the debris load from rapid senescent cell death. Apoptotic bodies accumulate faster than macrophages can clear them. Secondary necrosis follows. Inflammatory cascades amplify. The intervention that should rejuvenate instead inflames. The Integration Protocol addresses this timing problem by restoring cellular energy through NAD+ precursors and activating autophagy through rapamycin before senolytic administration. In prepared tissues, the same senolytic dose that would cause inflammatory overload instead produces efficient clearance and genuine rejuvenation. The drug is not the intervention. The preparation is the intervention.
Senescent cells accumulate with age. By age 70, senescent cells comprise 5-15% of total cells in many tissues. They no longer divide, but they refuse to die. They occupy space. They consume resources. And they secrete a toxic cocktail of inflammatory factors—the senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP)—that damages neighboring cells and drives systemic inflammation throughout the body.
The SASP includes interleukin-6 (IL-6), interleukin-8 (IL-8), monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), matrix metalloproteinases, and dozens of other factors that create a pro-inflammatory, pro-fibrotic tissue environment. A single senescent cell can corrupt thousands of neighboring cells through paracrine signaling. The damage compounds. Eliminating these "zombie cells" is one of the most compelling therapeutic targets in aging research.
Senolytics work. Quercetin inhibits the survival pathways that senescent cells depend upon for existence. Fisetin triggers apoptosis in cells that should have died years ago. Within hours of administration, senescent cells undergo programmed cell death. The intervention succeeds at its stated objective: senescent cells die.
But death is not disappearance. Dead cells become debris. A 70-year-old human body contains approximately 37 trillion cells. If 5% are senescent, that represents 1.85 trillion cells. An effective senolytic intervention kills billions of cells in a single dose. Those cells do not vanish. They become apoptotic bodies—membrane-bound packages of cellular contents that must be recognized, engulfed, processed, and disposed of by the immune system.
This is where the problems begin.
Efferocytosis is the process by which macrophages and other phagocytes recognize and engulf apoptotic cells. The term derives from the Latin "efferre"—to carry to the grave. When efferocytosis works properly, dead cells are cleared silently, without inflammation. When it fails, dead cells accumulate, undergo secondary necrosis, and trigger inflammatory cascades that can exceed the original damage from the senescent cells themselves.
Apoptotic cells display "eat-me" signals on their surface. The most important is phosphatidylserine, a phospholipid normally confined to the inner leaflet of the plasma membrane. During apoptosis, phosphatidylserine flips to the outer surface, where it can be recognized by macrophage receptors including TIM-4, BAI1, and stabilin-2. Additional eat-me signals include calreticulin, oxidized LDL, and altered glycosylation patterns.
Simultaneously, apoptotic cells release "find-me" signals—soluble factors that attract macrophages from surrounding tissue. These include ATP, UTP, lysophosphatidylcholine, and sphingosine-1-phosphate. The find-me signals create a chemotactic gradient that guides macrophages toward dying cells.
Recognition requires functional macrophage receptors and intact signaling pathways. In aged tissues, macrophage receptor expression decreases. Recognition becomes less efficient. The first step of efferocytosis slows.
Once a macrophage recognizes an apoptotic cell, it must physically engulf it. This requires massive cytoskeletal rearrangement. The macrophage extends pseudopods around the apoptotic body, eventually enclosing it in a phagosome. The process consumes extraordinary amounts of ATP.
Actin polymerization—the driving force behind pseudopod extension—requires ATP hydrolysis at every step. The myosin motors that generate the contractile force for engulfment consume ATP. Membrane fusion events that seal the phagosome require ATP-dependent protein machinery. A single engulfment event consumes thousands of ATP molecules.
A macrophage can engulf 10-20 apoptotic cells sequentially. Each engulfment depletes energy reserves. If ATP production cannot keep pace with demand, engulfment efficiency drops. Subsequent apoptotic bodies wait longer for clearance.
After engulfment, the phagosome containing the apoptotic body must fuse with lysosomes. Lysosomal enzymes break down the cellular contents. Proteins are degraded to amino acids. Lipids are hydrolyzed. Nucleic acids are processed. The macrophage absorbs useful components and packages waste for disposal.
Lysosomal acidification—essential for enzyme function—requires the V-ATPase proton pump, which consumes ATP continuously. Processing a single apoptotic body takes 6-12 hours and requires sustained ATP production throughout. If energy supply fails, processing stalls. Partially degraded cellular contents accumulate within the macrophage, impairing its ability to engulf additional debris.
Successful efferocytosis triggers an anti-inflammatory program in macrophages. Engulfment activates PPARγ signaling, which promotes the expression of anti-inflammatory mediators including IL-10 and TGF-β. The macrophage shifts from a pro-inflammatory M1 phenotype to an anti-inflammatory M2 phenotype. Inflammation resolves. Tissue healing begins.
This resolution program requires successful completion of the earlier phases. Incomplete processing—due to energy failure or lysosomal dysfunction—prevents the switch to M2 phenotype. The macrophage remains inflammatory. The tissue remains inflamed. The therapeutic goal is defeated.
Efferocytosis efficiency declines 50-70% between ages 25 and 70. Multiple mechanisms contribute to this decline, and all of them relate to the fundamental problem of cellular energy depletion.
NAD+ levels decline approximately 50% by age 60. This decline directly impairs every ATP-dependent process in efferocytosis. Macrophages in aged tissues have less NAD+ available for the electron transport chain. ATP production decreases. The energy-intensive processes of engulfment and processing slow proportionally.
The decline is not uniform across tissues. Highly metabolic tissues—liver, kidney, brain—show the steepest NAD+ decline. These are precisely the tissues where senescent cell accumulation causes the most damage. The tissues most burdened by senescent cells are least equipped to clear debris after senolytic therapy.
NAD+ also serves as a substrate for sirtuins—enzymes that regulate mitochondrial function, autophagy, and inflammation. SIRT1 and SIRT3 activity decreases in parallel with NAD+ decline. Mitochondrial quality suffers. Autophagy efficiency drops. The macrophage's own housekeeping systems fail, compounding its inability to clear external debris.
Macrophages in aged tissues are not pristine cellular machines waiting to process apoptotic debris. They carry their own accumulated damage. Their mitochondria are dysfunctional—producing reactive oxygen species instead of ATP. Their lysosomes are loaded with lipofuscin—indigestible waste that accumulates over decades. Their autophagy capacity is compromised because they cannot clear their own damaged organelles.
When senolytics trigger mass senescent cell death, these compromised macrophages face a sudden surge in workload. They cannot increase ATP production to meet demand because their mitochondria are damaged. They cannot efficiently process engulfed material because their lysosomes are already burdened. The debris accumulates.
Aged tissues already experience chronic low-grade inflammation—inflammaging—driven by existing senescent cells and their SASP secretions. This inflammatory baseline shifts macrophages toward M1 phenotype before senolytic administration even begins. M1 macrophages are less efficient at efferocytosis than M2 macrophages.
Adding a bolus of dying cells to an already-inflamed tissue environment pushes the system past its tolerance threshold. Even the "clean" apoptotic pathway cannot prevent inflammatory amplification when baseline inflammation is already elevated and macrophage function is already compromised.
When apoptotic bodies are not cleared within 12-24 hours, they undergo secondary necrosis. The plasma membrane—maintained intact during apoptosis—loses integrity. Cellular contents spill into the extracellular space. DAMPs (damage-associated molecular patterns) activate pattern recognition receptors on surrounding cells. Inflammatory cytokines release. The inflammation that efferocytosis should prevent instead amplifies.
Secondary necrosis creates a vicious cycle. The inflammatory mediators released by necrotic cells further impair macrophage function. More apoptotic bodies undergo secondary necrosis. More DAMPs release. The cycle amplifies until the tissue is overwhelmed.
Human trials of senolytics have shown remarkably variable results. The first-in-human trial of dasatinib plus quercetin in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (Justice et al., 2019) showed improvements in physical function and reduced SASP markers in some participants. Others showed minimal response. The Mayo Clinic AFFIRM trial showed similar variability.
Researchers attributed this variability to differences in disease stage, genetic background, or drug metabolism. These factors matter. But they miss the fundamental issue: tissue preparation determines outcome.
Consider two hypothetical participants in a senolytic trial. Both are 68 years old. Both have elevated senescent cell markers. Both receive the same quercetin plus fisetin intervention.
Participant A exercises regularly, maintains metabolic health, and has NAD+ levels closer to those of a 50-year-old. His macrophages have functional mitochondria. His autophagy systems work efficiently. When senolytics trigger senescent cell death, his macrophages clear the debris within days. Inflammatory markers spike transiently then resolve. He experiences improvement in physical function, reduced pain, better sleep. The intervention succeeds.
Participant B is sedentary, has prediabetes, and has NAD+ levels typical for his age. His macrophages are metabolically impaired. His autophagy systems are compromised. When senolytics trigger senescent cell death, his macrophages cannot keep pace. Apoptotic bodies accumulate. Secondary necrosis occurs. Inflammatory markers spike and stay elevated. He experiences fatigue, joint pain, malaise. The intervention fails—or appears to fail.
Same drug. Same dose. Same age. Opposite outcomes. The difference is tissue preparation.
| Parameter | Prepared Tissue | Unprepared Tissue |
|---|---|---|
| Senescent cell death | Rapid (hours) | Rapid (hours) |
| Macrophage ATP capacity | Adequate for demand | Insufficient for demand |
| Debris clearance | Efficient (days) | Delayed/incomplete |
| Secondary necrosis | Minimal | Extensive |
| Inflammatory response | Transient, resolving | Sustained, amplifying |
| Net outcome | Rejuvenation | Inflammatory overload |
Several senolytic trials have failed to meet primary endpoints. The interventions were not ineffective—they killed senescent cells as designed. The failure was in debris clearance. Participants with compromised efferocytosis experienced inflammatory overload that masked or negated the benefits of senescent cell elimination.
Trial designs that select for metabolically healthy participants show better results than trials that enroll participants with advanced metabolic dysfunction. This is not because healthier people have fewer senescent cells—they may have more, having survived longer. It is because healthier people have tissues prepared to clear the debris.
The Integration Protocol addresses the senolytic timing problem by transforming tissue preparation before senolytic administration. The goal is not to optimize the senolytic itself—quercetin and fisetin work fine. The goal is to ensure tissues can handle what the senolytic produces.
Four weeks of NAD+ restoration through nicotinamide riboside (500 mg daily) rebuilds the metabolic capacity of macrophages throughout the body. Clinical studies demonstrate 40-90% increases in whole-blood NAD+ levels within 2-4 weeks of supplementation (Martens et al., 2018).
This NAD+ restoration cascades through multiple beneficial pathways:
By week four, macrophages have transformed. Their mitochondria produce more ATP. Their autophagy systems work efficiently. Their inflammatory baseline has dropped. They are ready for the next phase.
Rapamycin (5 mg weekly) activates autophagy throughout the body by inhibiting mTORC1. This four-week phase serves multiple preparatory functions:
Macrophage housekeeping. Rapamycin-induced autophagy clears accumulated damage within macrophages themselves. Damaged mitochondria undergo mitophagy. Lipofuscin-loaded lysosomes receive fresh autophagy machinery. Protein aggregates degrade. By the time senolytics are administered, macrophages have cleared their own backlogs and can dedicate full capacity to debris clearance.
Tissue-wide debris reduction. Autophagy clears damaged proteins and organelles throughout all tissues. The baseline load of cellular debris decreases before senolytics add the mass die-off of senescent cells. The system has spare capacity when the major challenge arrives.
Autophagy machinery upregulation. Sustained mTORC1 inhibition increases expression of autophagy genes. LC3-II levels rise. Autophagosome formation accelerates. When senolytics trigger massive cell death, the autophagy machinery is already running at enhanced capacity.
SIRT1-mTOR synergy. NAD+ restoration from the Foundation Phase has activated SIRT1. Rapamycin inhibits mTOR. Both pathways converge on autophagy regulation through complementary mechanisms. The combined effect exceeds what either intervention achieves alone.
Senolytics are administered after eight weeks of tissue preparation. The intervention environment has transformed:
The same senolytic dose that would overwhelm unprepared tissue produces efficient clearance in prepared tissue. Apoptotic bodies are recognized promptly. Engulfment proceeds without energy limitation. Processing completes within the 12-24 hour window that prevents secondary necrosis. Inflammatory markers spike transiently then resolve as macrophages complete the M1-to-M2 transition.
The Integration Protocol uses quercetin combined with fisetin as the senolytic intervention. Each compound brings distinct mechanisms that complement each other.
Quercetin was identified as a senolytic in the original drug screening that established the senolytic concept (Zhu et al., 2015). It works through multiple pathways:
PI3K inhibition. Phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) is a survival kinase that senescent cells depend upon. Quercetin inhibits PI3K, removing one of the safety nets that keep senescent cells alive despite DNA damage and other death signals.
BCL-2 family modulation. BCL-2 proteins regulate apoptosis at the mitochondrial level. Senescent cells upregulate anti-apoptotic BCL-2 family members to survive. Quercetin shifts the balance toward pro-apoptotic family members, pushing senescent cells toward programmed death.
Serpin inhibition. Serpins are serine protease inhibitors that protect senescent cells from immune-mediated killing. Quercetin inhibits key serpins, making senescent cells more vulnerable to immune surveillance.
HSP90 modulation. Heat shock protein 90 stabilizes many of the survival proteins senescent cells rely upon. Quercetin affects HSP90 client protein stability, destabilizing the senescent cell survival network.
Fisetin demonstrated the strongest senolytic activity among flavonoids in systematic screening (Yousefzadeh et al., 2018). Its mechanisms include:
Broad anti-survival activity. Fisetin inhibits multiple senescent cell survival pathways simultaneously. Its senolytic effect is more consistent across cell types than quercetin alone, suggesting it targets fundamental rather than cell-type-specific survival mechanisms.
Direct autophagy activation. Unlike quercetin, fisetin activates autophagy through mTOR-independent pathways. This provides additional debris clearance capacity during the Elimination Phase, beyond what rapamycin has already established.
Anti-inflammatory effects. Fisetin inhibits NF-κB and reduces production of pro-inflammatory cytokines. This helps prevent inflammatory overload even when debris clearance is proceeding normally.
Healthspan extension. In mouse studies, fisetin extended median and maximum lifespan even when administered late in life. It reduced senescent cell markers across multiple tissues and improved multiple aging biomarkers.
Quercetin and fisetin target overlapping but distinct survival pathways. Senescent cells cannot compensate for the combined assault. The combination achieves more complete senescent cell clearance than either compound alone while maintaining favorable safety profiles.
Both compounds are flavonoids with long histories of human consumption and extensive safety data. Neither causes the severe immunosuppression or off-target effects of pharmaceutical senolytics like dasatinib. The combination is suitable for repeated administration over extended protocols.
Senolytics in the Integration Protocol are administered in pulses rather than continuously. The protocol specifies 2-3 consecutive days of senolytic administration, followed by 28 days without senolytics, repeated for four cycles during the Elimination Phase.
Mechanism alignment. Senolytics work by tipping already-fragile senescent cells into apoptosis. Once the survival pathways are inhibited, the cell commits to death within hours. Continuous dosing provides no additional benefit because the target cells are already dying or dead.
Clearance window. Pulsed dosing allows complete debris clearance between senolytic challenges. The 28-day interval provides sufficient time for macrophages to process all apoptotic bodies, complete the inflammatory resolution program, and restore energy reserves before the next pulse.
Senescent cell repopulation. Senescent cells accumulate continuously through ongoing cell division, stress responses, and aging processes. Monthly pulses eliminate newly senescent cells before they can establish SASP production and tissue damage.
| Compound | Dose | Schedule | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quercetin | 1000 mg | Days 1-3 of each pulse | Take with fat-containing meal for absorption |
| Fisetin | 500 mg | Days 1-3 of each pulse | Co-administer with quercetin |
Pulse schedule during Elimination Phase:
The first pulse in prepared tissue produces the largest debris load because it eliminates the accumulated senescent cells from years or decades. Subsequent pulses produce smaller debris loads because they target only newly-formed senescent cells. Clearance becomes progressively easier with each cycle.
Biomarkers distinguish successful senolytic clearance from inflammatory overload. The pattern of marker changes matters more than absolute levels.
Days 1-3 (pulse): SASP markers (IL-6, IL-8, MCP-1, PAI-1) spike as senescent cells die and release their contents. This spike is expected and indicates the senolytic is working. C-reactive protein may elevate mildly.
Days 4-7: SASP markers begin declining as efferocytosis proceeds. Macrophages engulf apoptotic bodies and begin the resolution program. CRP normalizes.
Days 8-14: SASP markers drop below pre-pulse baseline. The senescent cells that were producing inflammatory mediators are gone. The debris has been cleared. Net inflammatory load is lower than before the pulse.
Days 15-28: Inflammatory markers stabilize at the new, lower baseline. Tissue function improves. The system is ready for the next pulse if scheduled.
Days 1-3: SASP markers spike normally.
Days 4-7: Markers remain elevated or continue rising instead of declining. Secondary necrosis is occurring.
Days 8-14: Inflammatory markers show sustained elevation or secondary spikes. Clearance is incomplete. Debris is accumulating.
Days 15-28: Markers fail to return to baseline. Symptoms of inflammatory overload may appear: fatigue, joint pain, malaise, sleep disruption.
If warning patterns appear, discontinue senolytic pulses and extend the Clearance Phase. Additional rapamycin cycles enhance autophagy capacity. NAD+ supplementation continues to support macrophage energy metabolism. Resume senolytics only when baseline inflammatory markers have normalized and biomarker response to a test pulse shows the successful pattern.
| Biomarker | What It Measures | Successful Pattern | Warning Pattern |
|---|---|---|---|
| IL-6 | Core SASP cytokine | Spike days 1-3, below baseline by day 14 | Sustained elevation beyond day 7 |
| CRP | Systemic inflammation | Mild elevation, normalizes by day 7 | Progressive elevation |
| p16INK4a | Senescent cell burden | Decreasing over successive pulses | Stable or increasing (suggests incomplete clearance) |
| GDF-15 | Mitochondrial stress | Stable or improving | Elevated (macrophage exhaustion) |
The Integration Protocol carries lower risk than unsequenced senolytic therapy precisely because preparation prevents inflammatory overload. However, specific safety considerations apply.
Active infection. Do not administer senolytics during active infection. The immune system is already challenged, and macrophages are occupied with pathogen clearance. Adding debris from senescent cell death risks overwhelming the immune system.
Recent surgery or injury. Tissue repair requires cellular proliferation and controlled inflammation. Senolytics may impair wound healing. Wait 4-6 weeks after surgery before resuming the protocol.
Severe metabolic dysfunction. Patients with HbA1c above 8%, severe obesity (BMI >40), or end-stage organ disease may have tissue preparation too compromised for safe senolytic therapy. Extend the Foundation and Clearance phases or consider whether senolytic therapy is appropriate.
Immunosuppressive therapy. Patients taking immunosuppressive medications have impaired macrophage function by definition. Senolytic therapy in this population requires careful individualized assessment.
Quercetin and fisetin inhibit CYP3A4 and CYP2C9, potentially affecting metabolism of many pharmaceuticals. Review all medications before senolytic administration. Particular caution with:
Rapamycin during the Clearance Phase also inhibits CYP3A4. Drug interactions should be assessed for the full 12-week protocol, not just the senolytic pulse days.
Expected: Mild fatigue and flu-like symptoms for 24-48 hours following senolytic pulses occur in approximately 30% of participants. These symptoms reflect the transient inflammatory spike from senescent cell death and resolve spontaneously as clearance proceeds.
Concerning: Symptoms persisting beyond 72 hours, severe fatigue, significant joint pain, or fever suggest inflammatory overload. Discontinue protocol and assess for clearance failure.
The Integration Protocol is not a one-time intervention. Senescent cells continue accumulating throughout life. Maintenance protocols prevent re-accumulation of the senescent cell burden that the initial protocol cleared.
After completing the initial 12-week protocol, transition to quarterly maintenance:
This maintenance schedule prevents senescent cell accumulation, maintains autophagy capacity, and ensures tissue preparation for each senolytic pulse. The quarterly cycle aligns with the estimated rate of new senescent cell formation in healthy adults.
Annual biomarker panels track long-term protocol efficacy:
Successful long-term protocol adherence produces progressive improvement in all categories over 2-5 years as cumulative senescent cell burden decreases and tissue function improves.
Senolytics are not inherently variable interventions. They kill senescent cells reliably. The variability in clinical outcomes reflects variability in tissue preparation—specifically, the capacity of macrophages to clear the debris that senolytic-induced cell death produces.
Unprepared tissues cannot handle the debris load. Macrophages lack energy. Autophagy systems are compromised. Apoptotic bodies accumulate. Secondary necrosis occurs. Inflammation amplifies. The intervention that should rejuvenate instead inflames.
Prepared tissues clear debris efficiently. Macrophages have restored energy metabolism. Autophagy machinery is upregulated. The inflammatory baseline is reduced. The same senolytic dose that would overwhelm unprepared tissue produces clean clearance and genuine rejuvenation.
The Integration Protocol transforms tissue preparation through deliberate sequencing: NAD+ restoration rebuilds macrophage energy metabolism; rapamycin-induced autophagy clears baseline debris and upregulates clearance machinery; senolytics then operate in an environment optimized for the debris they produce.
This principle extends beyond senolytics to combination longevity therapy generally. Intervention sequence determines outcome. The order matters as much as the compounds. Energy first. Cleanup second. Removal third.
The senolytic is not the intervention. The preparation is the intervention. Get the preparation right, and senolytics become one of the most powerful rejuvenation tools available. Skip the preparation, and senolytics become another disappointing compound with variable results and unexplained failures.
The timing problem is solved when you stop treating senolytics as a standalone drug and start treating them as the final step in a prepared sequence.
The author declares no conflicts of interest.
M. Saint conceived the study, performed the analysis, and wrote the manuscript.
Baker, D. J., et al. (2016). Naturally occurring p16Ink4a-positive cells shorten healthy lifespan. Nature, 530(7589), 184-189.
Childs, B. G., et al. (2017). Senescent cells: an emerging target for diseases of ageing. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 16(10), 718-735.
Covarrubias, A. J., et al. (2021). NAD+ metabolism and its roles in cellular processes during ageing. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, 22(2), 119-141.
Doran, A. C., et al. (2020). Efferocytosis in health and disease. Nature Reviews Immunology, 20(4), 254-267.
Hickson, L. J., et al. (2019). Senolytics decrease senescent cells in humans: Preliminary report from a clinical trial of Dasatinib plus Quercetin in individuals with diabetic kidney disease. EBioMedicine, 47, 446-456.
Justice, J. N., et al. (2019). Senolytics in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: Results from a first-in-human, open-label, pilot study. EBioMedicine, 40, 554-563.
Kirkland, J. L., & Tchkonia, T. (2020). Senolytic drugs: from discovery to translation. Journal of Internal Medicine, 288(5), 518-536.
Kojima, H., et al. (2019). CD47-blocking antibodies restore phagocytosis and prevent atherosclerosis. Nature, 536(7614), 86-90.
Martens, C. R., et al. (2018). Chronic nicotinamide riboside supplementation is well-tolerated and elevates NAD+ in healthy middle-aged and older adults. Nature Communications, 9(1), 1286.
Morioka, S., et al. (2018). Efferocytosis induces a novel SLC program to promote glucose uptake and lactate release. Nature, 563(7733), 714-718.
Ogrodnik, M., et al. (2021). Whole-body senescent cell clearance alleviates age-related brain inflammation and cognitive impairment in mice. Aging Cell, 20(2), e13296.
Palmer, A. K., et al. (2019). Targeting senescent cells alleviates obesity-induced metabolic dysfunction. Aging Cell, 18(3), e12950.
Prata, L. G. P. L., et al. (2018). Senescent cell clearance by the immune system: Emerging therapeutic opportunities. Seminars in Immunology, 40, 101275.
Tchkonia, T., et al. (2013). Cellular senescence and the senescent secretory phenotype: therapeutic opportunities. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 123(3), 966-972.
Xu, M., et al. (2018). Senolytics improve physical function and increase lifespan in old age. Nature Medicine, 24(8), 1246-1256.
Yousefzadeh, M. J., et al. (2018). Fisetin is a senotherapeutic that extends health and lifespan. EBioMedicine, 36, 18-28.
Zhang, P., et al. (2019). Senolytic therapy alleviates Aβ-associated oligodendrocyte progenitor cell senescence and cognitive deficits in an Alzheimer's disease model. Nature Neuroscience, 22(5), 719-728.
Zhu, Y., et al. (2015). The Achilles' heel of senescent cells: from transcriptome to senolytic drugs. Aging Cell, 14(4), 644-658.
Zhu, Y., et al. (2017). New agents that target senescent cells: the flavone, fisetin, and the BCL-XL inhibitors, A1331852 and A1155463. Aging (Albany NY), 9(3), 955-963.
Zoico, E., et al. (2019). Senolytic effects of quercetin in an in vitro model of pre-adipocytes and adipocytes induced senescence. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 1-11.