Dasatinib plus quercetin in fibrotic MASH: a randomized placebo-controlled trial
In a small phase-2 trial in fibrotic MASH, intermittent dasatinib plus quercetin improved fibrosis stage and MASH resolution more often than placebo; adverse events were more frequent but self-limiting. [1]
Automatic summary · not editorially reviewed
The key findings
The source at a glance
- Study type / format
- Phase-2, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled proof-of-principle trial (abstract).
- Population / context
- Adults with fibrotic metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH); median age 56 years, 76% male, 58% with type 2 diabetes.
- Summary based on
- Study abstract
- Original publication
- October 1, 2026
Senolytic therapy tested in fibrotic MASH
The trial asked whether cellular senescence is a treatable target in people with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) and fibrosis. Thirty-one participants (median age 56 years; 76% male; 58% with type 2 diabetes) were randomized 1:1 to dasatinib plus quercetin (D + Q) or placebo. Treatment ran three consecutive days per week over 3 weeks, repeated across three 7-week cycles.
Supporting source [1]
Fibrosis and MASH outcomes versus placebo
The primary endpoint, at least one stage of fibrosis improvement without MASH worsening on paired liver biopsies, was reached by 47% of D + Q-treated participants versus 7% with placebo (P = 0.02). MASH resolution occurred in 53% versus 7% (P = 0.02), and the NAFLD Activity Score fell more with D + Q (-1.43 ± 1.22 versus -0.39 ± 0.77; P = 0.012). Single-nucleus RNA sequencing showed decreased senescence and fibrotic gene signatures and fewer fibrogenic cell populations in the D + Q group.
Supporting source [1]
Adverse events and proof-of-principle scope
Adverse events were more frequent in the D + Q group (82% versus 43%), but all were self-limiting. The authors describe this as a proof-of-principle trial and say it supports the need for future trials of senolytic therapy in fibrotic MASH. The abstract reports a small sample of 31 participants; the full text was not reviewed.
Supporting source [1]
How to interpret this
Abstract only; the full text was not reviewed. The sample was small (31 participants), and the authors call the trial proof-of-principle, supporting future trials rather than established treatment.
Based on the study abstract; the full paper, tables and supplementary data were not reviewed.
Source & supporting passages
Koning M, Kovynev A, Fondevila MF, Ruhe EJM, Mommersteeg MC, Ramakers C, Hutten BA, Verwer B, Vlug M, Kuiper T, van den Berg M, Vrieze A, Bizino M, van den Beld A, Berk L, Boerlage T, Augustijn QJJ, Brouwer WP, Chen WJ, Cahen D, Verdonk R, de Jonge WJ, Ramsoekh S, Doukas M, Vermorgen SMM, Verheij J, Beuers U, Takkenberg RB, Bergman JJG, D'Haens GRAM, Drenth JPH, Tchkonia T, Schnabl B, Kirkland JL, Meijnikman AS. · europepmc.org · October 1, 2026