Recognition and results
Healthy Longevity Clinic's program reached the Top 40 of XPRIZE Healthspan. In a small proof-of-concept study, statistically significant pre/post changes were detectable within eight weeks.
Healthy Longevity Clinic was a 2025 XPRIZE Healthspan Milestone 1 award recipient. The program evaluated in the competition combined a measured starting point, coordinated care and repeat measurement. Each client’s plan is adapted to their health, priorities and clinical assessment.
Several measures showed statistically significant pre/post improvement during the eight-week program, including a DNA-methylation pace-of-aging measure, HbA1c and Timed Up and Go. The short study window is practically encouraging: progress was measurable in weeks, supporting earlier reassessment during care. This was a single-arm study with 10 participants and no randomized control group. It cannot prove that the program caused every change or predict how quickly an individual client will improve.
The source report describes a prospective, single-arm, open-label, within-participant pre/post feasibility evaluation. Ten participants completed an eight-week multimodal programme. Mean age at baseline was 78.1 years (range 71–84); seven participants were women and three were men. There was no randomized control group.
The Prague study evaluated coordinated care with several components delivered together. It measured the combined programme, so it cannot identify the effect of any one therapy.
Selected group averages before and after the intervention. Changes in metabolic and physical measures sit alongside a slower DNA-methylation pace-of-aging estimate. These are observed changes in a small pilot study, not a prediction of your results. 10 participants; no randomized control group. Paired sample sizes vary by test. All p-values are unadjusted for multiple testing. The combined programme does not establish which component caused a change, or prove longer life.
The report used paired pre/post analysis for each endpoint, 95% confidence intervals, paired effect sizes and exact sign-flip permutation tests. The number of paired observations varied from seven to ten for some measures. The primary table reports unadjusted p-values across many endpoints, so individual findings need cautious interpretation.
All ten enrolled participants completed the programme and the report recorded no serious adverse events or post-enrolment withdrawals. It also recorded mild transient fatigue in several participants early in training. This small, selected cohort cannot establish safety for a wider population or for each component of the combined programme.
The Prague study evaluated coordinated care with several components delivered together. It measured the combined programme, so it cannot identify the effect of any one therapy.
An individual dietary plan, daily tracking and targeted supplements reviewed during the programme.
Supervised strength, aerobic and balance training two to three times a week, complemented by home exercises.
Yoga and mindfulness, scheduled red-light therapy and non-invasive neuromodulation formed part of the combined protocol.
Weekly coaching reviews and wearable monitoring of sleep, recovery and heart-rate variability supported follow-through. Assessments were repeated after the intervention.
Selected group averages before and after the intervention. Changes in metabolic and physical measures sit alongside a slower DNA-methylation pace-of-aging estimate. These are observed changes in a small pilot study, not a prediction of your results.
10 participants; no randomized control group. Paired sample sizes vary by test. All p-values are unadjusted for multiple testing. The combined programme does not establish which component caused a change, or prove longer life.
DunedinPACE estimates the pace of biological aging. It is a rate, not years of age reversed.
1.098 → 0.993 years/year
Δ -0.105 years/year · n=10 · p=0.002
Values and confidence interval ↓HbA1c reflects average blood sugar over the preceding months.
42.7 → 40.4 mmol/mol
Δ -2.3 mmol/mol · n=10 · p=0.008
Values and confidence interval ↓Time to stand up, walk, turn and sit down. A shorter time indicates a faster performance on this test.
9.22 → 7.11 s
Δ -2.11 s · n=9 · p=0.023
Values and confidence interval ↓A body-composition estimate of fat around internal organs, measured by bioimpedance.
136.3 → 130.06 cm²
Δ -6.24 cm² · n=7 · p=0.016
Values and confidence interval ↓Not every measure improved. The cognitive score, overall epigenetic-age estimates and telomere length did not show statistically significant change. The wearable recovery score decreased, and one modeled lung-age subscore moved in an adverse direction. These findings are part of the same study.
| Measure / unit | Before | After | Change Δ (95% CI) | n | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DNA-methylation pace of aging years/year | 1.098 | 0.993 | -0.105 (-0.143 … -0.067) | 10 | 0.002 |
| Long-term blood sugar · HbA1c mmol/mol | 42.7 | 40.4 | -2.3 (-3.56 … -1.04) | 10 | 0.008 |
| Mobility · Timed Up and Go s | 9.22 | 7.11 | -2.11 (-3.72 … -0.51) | 9 | 0.023 |
| Estimated visceral fat area cm² | 136.3 | 130.06 | -6.24 (-8.93 … -3.55) | 7 | 0.016 |
| Body fat % | 34.19 | 33.19 | -1 pp (-1.44 … -0.56) | 7 | 0.016 |
| Cognitive score · MoCA points | 25.7 | 26.9 | +1.2 (-1.16 … +3.56) | 10 | 0.316 |
| Overall epigenetic-age estimate years | 80.9 | 81.7 | +0.83 (-1.93 … +3.59) | 10 | 0.54 |
| Wearable recovery score % | 63.47 | 50.69 | -12.78 pp | 9 | 0.051 |
n is the number of participants with paired measurements. Δ is the report’s mean paired change; it can differ slightly from subtracting the rounded averages. CI means 95% confidence interval. A p-value below 0.05 is a statistical signal before correction for the many measures tested, not proof of clinical benefit.
Source: HLC XPRIZE Healthspan proof-of-concept clinical study report, v1.0 preview, 2026-04-20, sections 3.3, 4.4, 4.6–4.9, 5.
Study summary
Our research team answers scientific questions about the evaluation, its design and its limitations.
