MitoQ vs coenzyme Q10: the mitochondrial “power-grid” story inside neurodegeneration

Richard Moore
Jan 28
16 min read

When the lights flicker, the brain notices first

If you want a single image to hold in your mind, make it this: your brain is a city that never sleeps, and mitochondria are its power stations. When those power stations struggle, symptoms can feel less like a label and more like a slow blackout, one neighbourhood at a time.

Across conditions as different as Parkinson’s disease (PD), dementia, stroke, and motor neurone disease (MND), including amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), researchers keep circling back to recurring biological pressures. Impaired energy production, oxidative stress, and inflammatory signalling show up again and again, even if they are not the whole story (Jiménez-Jiménez et al., 2023). That is why “mitochondrial support” keeps attracting attention, especially two molecules that sound similar but behave very differently: coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10) and MitoQ (Mantle & Dybring, 2020; Snow et al., 2010).

This blog is about what these two compounds are, what the best human trials show, and how to keep hope realistic without flattening the science.

Meet the two “Q” molecules: one is native, one is targeted

CoQ10: the built-in spark plug

Coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10), also called ubiquinone in its oxidised form, is a fat-soluble molecule that sits in the inner mitochondrial membrane and helps move electrons through the electron transport chain (ETC). That electron flow supports production of adenosine triphosphate (ATP), the cell’s usable energy currency (Mantle & Dybring, 2020).

CoQ10 can also act as an antioxidant, helping limit damage from reactive oxygen species (ROS) that are generated as a by-product of energy production (Mantle & Dybring, 2020).

If mitochondria are power stations, CoQ10 is part of the wiring that helps electricity move through the grid.

MitoQ: the “security pass” version

MitoQ starts with a CoQ10-like “head” but adds a deliberate engineering trick. It is linked to a lipophilic, positively charged carrier that helps it accumulate inside mitochondria, where much ROS is generated (Rossman et al., 2018; (Snow et al., 2010)).

If standard CoQ10 is like sending a helpful engineer to the building, MitoQ is like giving that engineer a security pass that gets them into the control room of the power station, not just the lobby (Rossman et al., 2018; (Snow et al., 2010).

That targeting is the headline difference. It is also where the story becomes more complicated, because “getting into mitochondria” is not the same as “changing the course of a human disease.”

Ubiquinone vs ubiquinol: the battery-state question most people misunderstand

Inside the body, CoQ10 cycles between oxidised ubiquinone and reduced ubiquinol, and that cycling matters because it relates to electron transfer and antioxidant activity (Mantle & Dybring, 2020).

A useful analogy is a rechargeable battery. One state is primed to accept charge and the other is primed to deliver it.

Supplement marketing often implies ubiquinol is automatically superior, but the real world is messier. Absorption depends heavily on formulation, how well CoQ10 crystals are dispersed, and whether it is taken with dietary fat (Mantle & Dybring, 2020). Human pharmacokinetic work comparing forms supports the idea that blood levels can respond differently under controlled conditions, but it does not justify simplistic “one form always wins” conclusions for clinical outcomes (Zhang et al., 2018).

If you only remember one practical rule, make it this: if someone is spending money on CoQ10, formulation quality and taking it with a fat-containing meal may matter as much as whether the label says ubiquinone or ubiquinol (Mantle & Dybring, 2020).

The promise, the plot twist, and the hard truth: what do human trials actually show?

Here is the line that keeps this whole blog honest.

Mechanisms are the “why it could work” story. Randomised clinical trials are the “did it work in people” story. When those two disagree, we have to let the human data steer the claims.

Parkinson’s disease: big expectations, then a reality check

PD has been a major testing ground for mitochondrial strategies because mitochondrial dysfunction and oxidative stress are strongly implicated in PD biology (Jiménez-Jiménez et al., 2023). But when CoQ10 was tested in a large, rigorous randomised clinical trial in early PD (the QE3 trial), high-dose CoQ10 did not demonstrate clinical benefit compared with placebo (Beal et al., 2014).

The critical point is not that mitochondria do not matter. The critical point is that plausible mechanisms can fail to translate into measurable changes in disability, progression, or day-to-day function when tested properly (Beal et al., 2014).

MitoQ faced an even more direct test of its “mitochondrial targeting” promise. In a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial assessing MitoQ as a disease-modifying therapy in PD, MitoQ did not slow clinical progression compared with placebo (Snow et al., 2010).

This is exactly the kind of result that should keep us honest. The design was mechanistically elegant, but the clinical outcome did not move in the hoped-for direction (Snow et al., 2010).

A careful interpretation is that mitochondrial oxidative stress may be only one pressure among many, that timing and disease stage may be decisive, and that a therapy can reach a target without shifting the wider network that drives progression (Beal et al., 2014; Snow et al., 2010).

ALS and MND: the strongest emotions meet the hardest evidence standards

In ALS and MND, urgency can make “promising biology” feel like “promising treatment.” That is understandable, but it is also where precision matters most.

CoQ10 was tested in ALS in a phase II futility trial designed specifically to determine whether a phase III trial was justified. The conclusion was that the results did not support moving forward on efficacy grounds (Kaufmann et al., 2009). That is sobering, but it is also exactly why futility designs exist: to protect patients and resources from long, expensive trials when early signals are not there (Kaufmann et al., 2009).

For MitoQ, the neurological story is currently far more convincing in models than in people. For example, cell and animal studies in ALS-relevant systems suggest mitochondria-targeted antioxidants can influence oxidative damage and mitochondrial dysfunction pathways implicated in motor neuron injury (Cassina et al., 2008). That is biologically interesting, but it is not a proven human therapy. Model systems simplify biology, compress timelines, and do not capture the heterogeneity of human ALS, which can inflate optimism if we read them like clinical evidence (Cassina et al., 2008).

Dementia: a vast umbrella condition that resists simple supplement stories

Dementia is not one disease, and that heterogeneity alone makes supplement trials difficult. Reviews of CoQ10 in neurodegenerative disease contexts generally conclude that evidence for clear clinical benefit in dementia remains limited, despite plausible mechanisms around mitochondrial dysfunction and oxidative stress (Jiménez-Jiménez et al., 2023).

This is one of the most important thinking points in the whole conversation: oxidative stress can be real in dementia biology, but reducing oxidative stress with a supplement is not automatically the same as improving memory, function, or progression (Jiménez-Jiménez et al., 2023).

Stroke: a more time-defined window where mitochondria might be more reachable

Stroke is different from slow neurodegeneration. It is an acute injury, with a burst of oxidative stress and inflammation, followed by a recovery period where rehabilitation and cardiometabolic risk management strongly shape outcomes. That creates a narrower biological window where shifting oxidative stress biology might be more feasible.

In acute ischaemic stroke, a randomised trial reported that CoQ10 supplementation at 300 milligrams per day for four weeks was associated with improvements in neurological and cognitive scales, including the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) and the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) (Ramezani et al., 2020). More recently, a double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled study in acute ischaemic stroke used CoQ10 at 600 milligrams per day for 30 days starting within 24 hours of onset and reported reductions in malondialdehyde and interleukin-6 alongside increases in superoxide dismutase and brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), with no significant between-group differences in total antioxidant capacity or total thiol groups (Mojaver et al., 2025).

This is encouraging, but still early-stage evidence. Biomarkers and short scales are not the same as long-term disability outcomes, and these studies do not replace acute stroke care or rehabilitation. The most responsible translation is: CoQ10 may be a plausible adjunct worth studying further, not a replacement therapy (Mojaver et al., 2025; Ramezani et al., 2020).

The delivery problem: why this story keeps disappointing

Here is the quiet technical issue that ruins many supplement fairy tales: raising blood levels is not the same as meaningfully changing levels in the tissue that matters.

For CoQ10, bioavailability is a major variable, and formulation can substantially influence absorption (Mantle & Dybring, 2020). Even when a supplement reliably raises circulating CoQ10, that does not guarantee you have shifted mitochondrial function inside a specific brain region already under disease pressure (Mantle & Dybring, 2020).

This is where MitoQ’s concept is genuinely clever. It was designed to solve a delivery problem by accumulating in mitochondria (Rossman et al., 2018; Snow et al., 2010). The critical appraisal is that, in PD at least, this did not translate into disease modification in a controlled human trial (Snow et al., 2010).

A useful way to hold this in your mind is a smoke-alarm test.

In a lab, researchers can deliberately create “smoke” by stressing mitochondria, then measure whether an intervention reduces the alarm signal. That is useful. But it is not the same as proving you prevented the building fire.

A lab clue that helps the story, without overclaiming: tau “stickiness” under mitochondrial stress

A 2022 cell study makes a helpful point, as long as we keep it in the right evidence box.

The authors modelled long-term mitochondrial stress in cells and measured an early tau aggregation step called tau dimerisation. “Dimerisation” simply means two tau proteins sticking together, often an early step on the road toward larger aggregates (Samluk et al., 2022).

They used a technique called BiFC (bimolecular fluorescence complementation), which is essentially a molecular “glow test.” Two halves of a fluorescent protein are attached to tau. If tau molecules come close enough to bind or cluster, the fluorescent halves meet and the cell glows, allowing researchers to quantify that early aggregation step (Samluk et al., 2022).

They found that long-term mitochondrial stress increased the tau dimerisation signal, and that reducing oxidative stress using ROS scavengers such as N-acetylcysteine (NAC) or MitoQ reduced it (Samluk et al., 2022).

This supports a plausible idea: when mitochondria run “hot” and redox balance shifts, the cell’s protein quality-control systems can get strained, and proteins can become more likely to misfold or stick.

In plain English: this is not a human trial. It uses cell lines, engineered tau expression, and a very specific early readout. It strengthens the “why it could matter” story. It does not justify claiming we can prevent or reverse tau-driven neurodegeneration in people by taking MitoQ (Samluk et al., 2022).

The “factory conveyor belt” problem: ISR, proteostasis, and why more output can mean more trouble

If the tau study has a deeper lesson, it is about proteostasis, which is the cell’s ability to keep proteins correctly folded, correctly placed, and correctly cleared. Proteostasis is like a city’s waste management plus quality-control combined. If it fails, clutter accumulates and systems jam.

This is where another concept enters: the integrated stress response (ISR).

Here is the ISR in plain English. Imagine a factory that suddenly receives faulty parts. The safest move is to slow the conveyor belt so fewer defective products get built. That slowdown is the ISR. If you force the belt to speed up again while quality control is still struggling, you may keep output high, but you risk flooding the warehouse with misfolded, sticky inventory.

Biologically, the ISR partly acts through a molecular switch called eIF2α (eukaryotic translation initiation factor 2 alpha), which influences how much new protein the cell makes. When eIF2α is phosphorylated, the cell tends to reduce global protein production, like slowing the conveyor belt (Samluk et al., 2022).

In that 2022 paper, the authors observed that long-term mitochondrial stress was associated with reduced ISR signalling, and that pharmacologically inhibiting the ISR increased early tau dimerisation. In contrast, partially restoring ISR signalling modestly reduced tau dimerisation (Samluk et al., 2022).

Why this belongs in a MitoQ vs CoQ10 blog: it explains why “reducing oxidative stress” is not a simple lever. Neurodegeneration is not one broken part. It is a network under strain. You can reduce one alarm signal in a cell model and still fail to move real-world symptoms or progression in humans. That is exactly what makes the negative PD trial so important context for MitoQ (Snow et al., 2010).

Traumatic brain injury (TBI): when mitochondria face a shock, not a slow blackout

TBI is a clearer example of why timing can decide whether mitochondrial strategies look impressive or irrelevant.

If chronic neurodegeneration is a long, slow voltage drop across a city, TBI is more like a transformer exploding. The biological priority becomes limiting the immediate oxidative surge and preventing downstream cell-death cascades.

In a mouse TBI model, MitoQ given soon after injury was associated with improved neurological scores, reduced brain oedema, and fewer apoptotic neurons. The authors also reported changes consistent with activation of the Nrf2-ARE antioxidant response pathway (Zhou et al., 2018).

In plain English, Nrf2 is like an emergency coordinator for antioxidant defence. When activated, it moves into the nucleus and turns on genes that help cells neutralise oxidative damage. ARE refers to a DNA control region that Nrf2 binds to in order to increase antioxidant and detox gene expression (Zhou et al., 2018).

Think of it like a fire drill, not a real-world fire report. In a tightly controlled mouse model, given early and measured over days, MitoQ looks like it can reduce some of the “smoke and damage signals” after brain injury. That is useful. But it is not the same as showing it prevents dementia or slows Alzheimer’s in people over years.

What does MitoQ research actually add, once you strip away the marketing?

A good rule in science is to treat a brand website as a map, not a judge. It can help you locate papers, but the meaningful question is what the peer-reviewed evidence shows when you look across the full literature, including studies that are not curated for marketing (Snow et al., 2010).

In human studies, MitoQ’s strongest direct neurological test remains the PD trial, and it was negative for slowing progression (Snow et al., 2010). That is the hard truth anchor.

Where MitoQ’s human evidence becomes more substantial is in physiology endpoints that are indirectly relevant to brain health.

In a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind crossover trial in healthy late middle-aged and older adults with impaired endothelial function, six weeks of oral MitoQ at 20 milligrams per day improved brachial artery flow-mediated dilation (FMD) and reduced oxidised low-density lipoprotein, and it was reported as well tolerated in that context (Rossman et al., 2018). This matters because vascular function supports brain health, particularly for stroke risk and vascular contributions to cognitive impairment. But FMD is still a surrogate endpoint, not proof of reduced stroke incidence or slower cognitive decline (Rossman et al., 2018).

In a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in healthy men, MitoQ supplementation was associated with reduced exercise-induced mitochondrial deoxyribonucleic acid (mtDNA) damage, suggesting biological activity in vivo (Williamson et al., 2020). Again, mtDNA damage markers are mechanistic signals, not clinical endpoints, and “health volunteers under exercise stress” is not the same population as people living with neurodegenerative disease (Williamson et al., 2020).

In preclinical neurological research, there are multiple signals that MitoQ can influence oxidative stress pathways and neurodegeneration-relevant phenotypes, but these should be treated as hypothesis-generating rather than outcome-proving. For instance, MitoQ has shown effects in experimental models relevant to Parkinsonian biology (Ghosh et al., 2010), Huntington’s disease redox and proteostasis stress (Pinho et al., 2020), repetitive mild traumatic brain injury outcomes at a chronic time point (Tabet et al., 2022), and a mouse model of autosomal recessive spastic ataxia of Charlevoix-Saguenay (ARSACS) with reported improvements in motor coordination and reduced Purkinje cell death (Márquez et al., 2023). These are scientifically valuable, but they also sit on the wrong side of the translational gap that has humbled many “neuroprotective” candidates (Ghosh et al., 2010; Márquez et al., 2023; Pinho et al., 2020; Tabet et al., 2022).

One more nuance that matters for the hope narrative: even within animal work, results can vary by model, dosing, outcome, and whether interventions are started before substantial pathology is established. Timing often decides whether mitochondria-targeted strategies look impressive or irrelevant.

Food vs supplementation: can you eat your way to these levels?

CoQ10 is present in foods, especially organ meats and some fish, but typical dietary intakes are generally in the low milligram range, while clinical studies often use hundreds of milligrams per day (Mantle & Dybring, 2020). This is the difference between supporting baseline nutrition and attempting a pharmacological effect (Mantle & Dybring, 2020).

MitoQ is not obtained from food. It is a synthetic mitochondria-targeted compound designed for delivery (Rossman et al., 2018; Snow et al., 2010).

What does this mean practically, for someone living with these conditions?

If you are living with PD or ALS, the most responsible interpretation is that neither CoQ10 nor MitoQ has proven disease-modifying benefit in rigorous human trials for those specific conditions (Beal et al., 2014; Kaufmann et al., 2009; Snow et al., 2010).

That does not mean they are “useless,” but it does mean the goal should be framed differently. Many people explore these compounds as part of a broader strategy aimed at resilience around energy, oxidative stress, vascular health, and symptom-adjacent support, rather than expecting slowed progression.

In stroke recovery, the human signal for CoQ10 is more encouraging, but still early. The translation is “possible adjunct biology,” not “replacement therapy” (Mojaver et al., 2025; Ramezani et al., 2020). For MitoQ, the TBI animal data supports a plausible acute-injury mechanism story via antioxidant defence signalling, but it still needs human outcome data before strong clinical positioning is justified (Zhou et al., 2018).

Contraindications and who should be cautious

CoQ10 and MitoQ are often described as generally well tolerated in research settings, but “well tolerated” does not mean “appropriate for everyone,” particularly in complex medication contexts (Mantle & Dybring, 2020; Rossman et al., 2018).

The most practical caution zone is medication complexity, especially anticoagulants and cardiovascular regimens, where supplement changes should be discussed with the prescribing clinician. Although some controlled studies have not shown a clinically meaningful interaction between CoQ10 and warfarin under specific conditions, clinical caution remains prudent because anticoagulation safety depends on individualised dosing and monitoring (Engelsen et al., 2003).

Pregnancy and breastfeeding are typically treated as caution zones for non-essential supplementation because robust safety datasets are often limited.

For MitoQ, there is an additional evidence caution: it should not be positioned as a proven disease-modifying therapy for neurodegenerative disease, because the strongest direct neurological human trial in PD did not show that effect (Snow et al., 2010).

So which is better: MitoQ or CoQ10?

If “better” means “most studied in neurological clinical trials,” CoQ10 wins by volume, even though the most rigorous PD trial was negative (Beal et al., 2014; Jiménez-Jiménez et al., 2023; Kaufmann et al., 2009).

If “better” means “most engineered delivery concept,” MitoQ is the more targeted molecule, and it has credible human data showing physiological effects and mechanistic activity, plus a wide preclinical neurological footprint (Rossman et al., 2018; Snow et al., 2010; Williamson et al., 2020). But elegant design is not the same as clinical impact, and PD remains the clearest reminder of that (Snow et al., 2010).

If “better” means “most pragmatic starting point for many people,” CoQ10 is often the conventional entry point, provided expectations are framed honestly, absorption is optimised, and medication context is respected (Mantle & Dybring, 2020).

How You Nutrition Clinic can help: hope, but engineered

At You Nutrition Clinic, we work with people who want both hope and rigour. That means we translate the science into a practical plan that fits real life, and we keep claims aligned with evidence. If you are living with Parkinson’s disease, dementia, stroke recovery, ALS, or another neurological condition, we can support you with a personalised nutrition and lifestyle strategy that targets energy metabolism, inflammation, cardiometabolic risk factors, and gut-brain resilience, while coordinating with your medical team where appropriate.

If you want support deciding whether CoQ10, ubiquinol, or mitochondria-targeted supplements make sense for your situation, including medication safety and realistic goal-setting, book a consultation via younutritionclinic.com.

If you want the deeper science translated in plain English, you can also explore more articles at nutritionandthebrain.com/blog.

Stay curious. Stay hopeful. Support your brain. 🧠

🧩 Connect with us

👉 @nutritionandthebrain

References

Aaseth, J., Alexander, J., & Alehagen, U. (2021). Coenzyme Q10 supplementation – In ageing and disease. Mechanisms of Ageing and Development, 197, 111521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mad.2021.111521

Beal, M. F., Oakes, D., Shoulson, I., Henchcliffe, C., Galpern, W. R., Haas, R., Juncos, J. L., Nutt, J. G., Voss, T. S., Ravina, B., Shults, C. M., Hellesen, A., Seibyl, J., Lew, M. F., Griebner, B., Watts, A., Gao, S., Pourcher, E., Bond, L., … Parkinson Study Group QE3 Investigators. (2014). A randomized clinical trial of high-dosage coenzyme Q10 in early Parkinson disease: No evidence of benefit. JAMA Neurology, 71(5), 543–552. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2014.131

Cassina, P., Cassina, A., Pehar, M., Castellanos, R., Gandelman, M., de León, A., Robinson, K. M., Mason, R. P., Beckman, J. S., Barbeito, L., & Radi, R. (2008). Mitochondrial dysfunction in SOD1G93A-bearing astrocytes promotes motor neuron degeneration: Prevention by mitochondrial-targeted antioxidants. Journal of Neuroscience, 28(16), 4115–4122.

Gane, E. J., Weilert, F., Orr, D. W., Keogh, G. F., Gibson, M., Lockhart, M. M., Frampton, C. M., Taylor, K. M., Smith, R. A. J., & Murphy, M. P. (2010). The mitochondria-targeted anti-oxidant mitoquinone decreases liver damage in a phase II study of hepatitis C patients. Liver International, 30(7), 1019–1026. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1478-3231.2010.02250.x

Ghosh, A., Chandran, K., Kalivendi, S. V., Joseph, J., Antholine, W. E., Hillard, C. J., Kanthasamy, A., Kanthasamy, A. G., & Kalyanaraman, B. (2010). Neuroprotection by a mitochondria-targeted drug in a Parkinson’s disease model. Free Radical Biology and Medicine, 49(11), 1674–1684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2010.08.028

Hernández-Camacho, J. D., Bernier, M., López-Lluch, G., & Navas, P. (2018). Coenzyme Q10 supplementation in aging and disease. Frontiers in Physiology, 9, 44. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2018.00044

Jiménez-Jiménez, F. J., Alonso-Navarro, H., García-Martín, E., & Agúndez, J. A. G. (2023). Coenzyme Q10 and dementia: A systematic review. Antioxidants, 12(2), 533. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox12020533

Kaufmann, P., Thompson, J. L. P., Levy, G., Buchsbaum, R., Shefner, J., Krivickas, L. S., Katz, J., Rollins, Y., Barohn, R. J., Jackson, C. E., Tiryaki, E., Lomen-Hoerth, C., Armon, C., Tandan, R., Rudnicki, S. A., Rezania, K., Sufit, R., Pestronk, A., Novella, S. P., … Levin, B. (2009). Phase II trial of CoQ10 for ALS finds insufficient evidence to justify phase III. Annals of Neurology, 66(2), 235–244. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.21743

Kelso, G. F., Porteous, C. M., Coulter, C. V., Hughes, G., Porteous, W. K., Ledgerwood, E. C., Smith, R. A. J., & Murphy, M. P. (2001). Selective targeting of a redox-active ubiquinone to mitochondria within cells: Antioxidant and antiapoptotic properties. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 276(7), 4588–4596. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M009093200

Landbo, C., & Almdal, T. P. (1998). [Interaction between warfarin and coenzyme Q10]. Ugeskrift for Laeger, 160(22), 3226–3227.

Mantle, D., & Dybring, A. (2020). Bioavailability of coenzyme Q10: An overview of the absorption process and subsequent metabolism. Antioxidants, 9(5), 386. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox9050386

Márquez, B. T., Leung, T. C. S., Hui, J., Charron, F., McKinney, R. A., & Watt, A. J. (2023). A mitochondrial-targeted antioxidant (MitoQ) improves motor coordination and reduces Purkinje cell death in a mouse model of ARSACS. Neurobiology of Disease, 183, 106157.

Miquel, E., Cassina, A., Martínez-Palma, L., Souza, J. M., Bolatto, C., Rodríguez-Bottero, S., Logan, A., Smith, R. A. J., Murphy, M. P., & Barbeito, L. (2014). Neuroprotective effects of the mitochondria-targeted antioxidant MitoQ in a model of inherited amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Free Radical Biology and Medicine, 70, 204–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2014.02.019

Mojaver, A., Khazaei, M., Ahmadpanah, M., Zarei, M., Soleimani Asl, S., Habibi, P., & Shahidi, S. (2025). Dietary intake of coenzyme Q10 reduces oxidative stress in patients with acute ischemic stroke: A double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled study. Neurological Research, 47(3), 232–241. https://doi.org/10.1080/01616412.2025.2470712

Pinho, B. R., Duarte, A. I., Canas, P. M., Moreira, P. I., Murphy, M. P., & Oliveira, J. M. A. (2020). The interplay between redox signalling and proteostasis in neurodegeneration: In vivo effects of a mitochondria-targeted antioxidant in Huntington’s disease mice. Free Radical Biology and Medicine, 146, 372–382.

Ramezani, M., Sahraei, Z., Simani, L., Heydari, K., & Shahidi, F. (2020). Coenzyme Q10 supplementation in acute ischemic stroke: Is it beneficial in short-term administration? Nutritional Neuroscience, 23(8), 640–648. https://doi.org/10.1080/1028415X.2018.1542790

Rossman, M. J., Santos-Parker, J. R., Steward, C. A. C., Bispham, N. Z., Cuevas, L. M., Rosenberg, H. L., Woodward, K. A., Chonchol, M., & Seals, D. R. (2018). Chronic supplementation with a mitochondrial antioxidant (MitoQ) improves vascular function in healthy older adults. Hypertension, 71(6), 1056–1063. https://doi.org/10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.117.10787

Shi, G., Miller, C., Kuno, S., Rey Hipolito, A. G., El Nagar, S., Riboldi, G. M., Korn, M., Tran, W. C., Wang, Z., Ficaro, L., Lin, T., Spillier, Q., Gamallo-Lana, B., Jones, D. R., Snuderl, M., Song, S. C., Mar, A. C., Joyner, A. L., Sillitoe, R. V., … Pacold, M. E. (2025). Coenzyme Q headgroup intermediates can ameliorate a mitochondrial encephalopathy. Nature, 645(8080), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-025-09246-x

Snow, B. J., Rolfe, F. L., Lockhart, M. M., Frampton, C. M., O’Sullivan, J. D., Fung, V., Smith, R. A. J., Murphy, M. P., & Taylor, K. M. (2010). A double-blind, placebo-controlled study to assess the mitochondria-targeted antioxidant MitoQ as a disease-modifying therapy in Parkinson’s disease. Movement Disorders, 25(11), 1670–1674. https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.23148

Tabet, M., El-Kurdi, M., Haidar, M. A., Nasrallah, L., Reslan, M. A., Shear, D., Pandya, J. D., El-Yazbi, A. F., Sabra, M., Mondello, S., Mechref, Y., Shaito, A., Wang, K. K., El-Khoury, R., & Kobeissy, F. (2022). Mitoquinone supplementation alleviates oxidative stress and pathologic outcomes following repetitive mild traumatic brain injury at a chronic time point. Experimental Neurology, 351, 113987. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.expneurol.2022.113987

Williamson, J., Hughes, C. M., Cobley, J. N., & Davison, G. W. (2020). The mitochondria-targeted antioxidant MitoQ attenuates exercise-induced mitochondrial DNA damage. Redox Biology, 36, 101673. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.redox.2020.101673

Zhang, Y., Liu, J., Chen, X. Q., & Oliver Chen, C.-Y. (2018). Ubiquinol is superior to ubiquinone to enhance Coenzyme Q10 status in older men. Food & Function, 9(11), 5653–5660.