The NOVOS Core clinical trial has been peer-reviewed and published in European Heart Journal Open. The results were first shared in February 2026 as a preprint, a public version of the paper released before journal review. Passing peer review is a milestone for NOVOS Core, and it raises a fair question: What does “peer-reviewed” tell you about a study? Here, we take a closer look at what the process entails and share details about the trial.
Quick Overview
- Peer review is an evaluation of a research paper by independent experts before a journal agrees to publish it.
- Reviewers assess a study’s design, analysis, and conclusions. They don’t repeat the experiment.
- The NOVOS Core trial was posted as a preprint in February 2026 and published in European Heart Journal Open after peer review.
- The University of Surrey ran the investigator-initiated trial. NOVOS supplied the product, the placebo, and an unrestricted contribution toward research costs. One of the seven authors is a NOVOS employee.
- In the six-month trial, NOVOS Core improved three vascular health markers versus placebo in generally healthy, non-smoking adults over 40.*
What Is Peer Review?
The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) defines peer review as “the critical assessment of manuscripts submitted to journals by experts who are usually not part of the editorial staff.”
The process runs in a few steps. Researchers submit a manuscript to a journal. An editor decides whether it fits the journal and, if so, sends it to specialists in the field. Those reviewers report back on the methods, the statistics, and whether the conclusions follow from the data. The authors respond to each point, often by adding analyses, filling in detail, or narrowing their claims. The editor then accepts the paper, asks for more changes, or rejects it.
For a clinical trial, editors and reviewers can check a trial against a standard checklist called CONSORT, which sets out what a trial report should include, addressing questions like:
- Were participants randomly assigned, and did they and the researchers know who got what?
- Was the main outcome chosen before the trial started?
- Do the statistics fit the study design?
- Do the conclusions stay within what the data show?
What Peer Review Doesn’t Do
Peer review checks reasoning and reporting. It has limits, and they apply to every study you read, this one included.
- Reviewers don’t repeat the experiment. They judge the study from the manuscript the authors submit, so their judgment depends on how completely the authors describe what they did.
- Reviewers can miss errors. In a study testing whether training improves reviewers’ accuracy, 607 medical journal reviewers were sent papers with nine major errors planted in each. Training made only a small difference, and reviewers caught about a third of the errors on average. That’s one reason scientists look for findings to be confirmed in later studies.
- Peer review doesn’t change what a study measured. The NOVOS Core trial measured three vascular health markers over six months. Publication means the paper met the journal’s standards for review and reporting. It doesn’t extend them to long-term health outcomes that a six-month trial can’t measure.
Preprint vs. Published Paper: What’s the Difference?
A preprint is a complete research paper posted publicly before peer review. Preprints let other scientists read and question the work while the slower journal process runs. The two versions can differ, because peer reviewers often ask authors to add analyses, clarify methods, or adjust their conclusions.
The NOVOS Core trial was posted as a preprint on SSRN on February 20, 2026. The peer-reviewed version was published on November 4, 2026, in European Heart Journal Open, an official peer-reviewed journal of the European Society of Cardiology.
The journal version is now the official, final version of the study, and NOVOS content cites it going forward.
Who Ran the Study?
Many companies hire a contract research organization (CRO) to run trials of their products. U.S. federal regulations define a CRO as an independent contractor that takes on duties of the sponsor, such as designing the protocol and monitoring the study. CROs are a standard part of clinical research. In that model, the company paying for the trial is also its sponsor.
The NOVOS Core trial used a different model. It was investigator-initiated, meaning university researchers led it. The University of Surrey sponsored the study and ran it with Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust. Professor Christian Heiss, a professor of cardiovascular medicine at Surrey, led it as chief investigator. University researchers recruited participants and collected the data.
NOVOS’s Role in the Trial
- NOVOS supplied NOVOS Core, the matching placebo, and an unrestricted contribution toward research costs.
- NOVOS had no role in study design, data collection, primary interpretation of the data, or the decision to publish. The University of Surrey researchers kept control of the study data.
- One of the seven authors, Diogo Barardo, PhD, is a NOVOS employee and NOVOS’s Director of R&D; he independently reproduced the statistical analyses and, like all authors, reviewed and approved the final manuscript. He is a former Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Center for Healthy Longevity at the National University of Singapore. He also led the creation of DrugAge, a public research database of compounds shown to extend lifespan in lab organisms such as yeast, worms, flies, and mice.
The trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06145087), a public database of clinical studies. Registration records a trial’s planned design and main outcome, which anyone can check later. The ICMJE recommends that medical journals require registration to “prevent selective publication and selective reporting of research outcomes.”
The study record was first submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov in March 2023, before the trial began, and became public in November 2023, after recruitment had started. The main outcome listed on the registry, the change in flow-mediated dilation at six months, is the same primary outcome reported in the paper.
What the Trial Found
Sixty-one generally healthy, non-smoking adults aged 40 and over were randomly assigned to take NOVOS Core (33 people) or a placebo (28 people) daily for six months, and 43 had measurements at both the start and at six months. Neither the participants nor the researchers knew who was taking which. Compared with placebo, NOVOS Core improved three vascular health markers at six months:*
- Flow-mediated dilation, a measure of how well blood vessels widen as blood flow increases, improved by 2.9 percentage points more than with placebo. This finding was the trial’s primary outcome.
- Pulse wave velocity, a measure of arterial flexibility, fell by 1.18 meters per second (m/s) more than with placebo.
- Systolic blood pressure fell by 6.1 mmHg more than with placebo. Participants’ average blood pressure was within the normal range at the start of the trial.
Cholesterol and other blood fats did not change. The trial was run at one study center with a relatively small group; 18 of the 61 people randomized did not complete the six-month visit, intake was tracked by diary only, and the trial cannot show which ingredients caused the changes.
Larger and longer studies would be needed to confirm these results and to show whether they carry over to other groups. For a closer look at each measure, read the full NOVOS Core clinical trial results.
See also: NOVOS Clinical Studies Hub
FAQ About Peer Review and the NOVOS Core Trial
Is the NOVOS Core clinical trial peer-reviewed?
Yes. The trial was peer-reviewed and published in European Heart Journal Open on November 4, 2026. An earlier version was posted as a preprint on SSRN.
What is the difference between a preprint and a peer-reviewed study?
A preprint is posted publicly before any journal review. A peer-reviewed study has been assessed by independent experts and accepted by a journal, usually after revisions.
Does peer review mean a study’s results are correct?
No. Peer review checks whether a study’s methods and conclusions hold up on paper. Reviewers don’t repeat the experiment, and they can miss errors. Confirmation comes from repeated studies.
Who funded the NOVOS Core clinical trial?
NOVOS supported the investigator-initiated trial by providing NOVOS Core, the matching placebo, and an unrestricted research contribution to the University of Surrey. NOVOS had no role in the study design, data collection, primary analysis or interpretation, or the decision to submit the paper. One of the seven authors is a NOVOS employee.
How can I tell if an article is peer-reviewed?
Check where it was published. Peer-reviewed papers appear in academic journals, and the journal’s website describes its review process. Published papers often list the dates the manuscript was received and accepted. Papers on preprint servers such as SSRN, bioRxiv, or medRxiv haven’t been through peer review yet, so read them as early findings.
*These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.
Journal names are given for reference only and do not imply endorsement by the journals, their publishers, or the European Society of Cardiology.
