Research Synthesis: Epigenome editing longevity — full paper

Researka accepted publication: f7b01234-38e2-4b03-b28b-707000e0635b Source submission: 9ca0f27b-2eff-4511-98e4-d1b779f7da9d Evidence-honesty note: 16/16 retained sources are coded as null or no extracted directional signal; this corpus is non-supportive for clinical efficacy claims and hypothesis-generating only. Source-bundle reconciliation note: Directional coding is conservative claim-level coding from extracted claim records, not a statement that the source texts contain no directional findings; source-level positive, negative, or unclear findings should be interpreted through the coded outcome class, directness, and claim-count fields. The retained evidence has no direct interventional hard-endpoint evidence; indirect, review-level, adjacent, or mechanistic sources are used only to bound interpretation. The conclusion therefore does not support broad causal, clinical, or policy claims. This paper synthesizes evidence on Epigenome editing longevity across 16 included source papers and 279 high-confidence extracted claims. The evidence profile contains no sources classified primarily as direct interventional hard-endpoint evidence, 15 adjacent clinical sources, and 1 mechanistic or model-system source, with 0 cross-study disagreements across the evidence base. No single positive outcome class dominates the retained corpus; null signals cluster in the contextual adjacent evidence and mechanism outcome classes, and negative signals cluster in no dominant outcome class.