CHAMGAP
APPROVEDReviewed and approved by the Chamgap Editorial Team (2026-07-06). The draft was written by AI, all 7 cited sources were opened and checked for existence, and the verdict passed blind grading and adversarial audit. Methodology v0.6.
Verdict No. 022 · Search date 2026-07-06 · Methodology v0.6

Cissus,
does it really help with body weight and body fat reduction?

30-Second Summary
D
Evidence Grade D · Safety unknown
Human evidence is insufficient or was not confirmed in key trials.
What the
research shows
Bottom line: human evidence exists that Cissus quadrangularis reduces body weight and body fat, but positive clinical trials reporting large weight loss are effectively concentrated in one research group (corresponding author Julius Oben) and one raw-material supplier line (Gateway Health Alliances). In the independent Thai double-blind trial confirmed to have no conflicts of interest (Chatree 2021), neither body weight nor body-fat percentage decreased significantly, and only waist circumference decreased by about 2.7cm. This independent trial has a limitation of only 30 participants, but it is the only clearly independent weight trial within the confirmed scope, and the weight effect was not reproduced there. The independent review Maunder 2020 concluded that evidence is insufficient to recommend herbal weight-loss products including cissus. The grade is D (not confirmed in key trial).
What the
ads claim
In weight-loss supplement advertising/marketing, phrases such as 'cissus 300mg body fat reduction,' 'clinically proven weight and abdominal fat reduction,' and 'confirmed by DEXA' are commonly used, and positive numbers above may be cited (this verification did not secure and compare specific ad originals/URLs, so links between individual product ads and specific papers are follow-up items). However, original papers confirm that many positive numbers came from raw-material supplier/same-author-line trials, and some results were from combination products containing green tea, caffeine, and chromium rather than cissus alone.
*

Useful facts when choosing a product

  • Research dose vs market content: positive human trials generally used about 300mg/day of extract. Whether a market product has the same ingredient, standardization (ketosteroid %), and dose as the trials must be checked on each label; domestic labels were not investigated in this scope.
  • The Oben 2006 result with the largest weight loss was not 'cissus alone' but a combination product (Cylaris) containing green tea extract (EGCG/caffeine), chromium, and others, making direct application to a single cissus product difficult.
  • The test ingredient in large positive trials is a commercial CQR-300 line, with Gateway Health Alliances repeatedly appearing as supplier. Whether a specific market ad's 'clinically proven' claim relies on this line was not compared here.
  • In the independent trial confirmed to have no conflicts (Chatree 2021), weight did not decrease significantly. Within confirmed scope, 'waist circumference may decrease somewhat' is closer to independent evidence than 'weight comes off' (but the trial was small, n=30).
  • Safety is left as 'unknown.' Short-term trials reported no serious adverse events, but long-term safety/interaction data and independent safety assessment are insufficient.
Gap Measurement · Verdict 022 · D
What advertising claims
What independent, higher-quality research supports
△ GAP
01

What the research actually shows

The studies split into two branches. (1) Manufacturer-linked research: Oben 2006 (combination product Cylaris, -6.6 to -8.1kg), Oben 2008 (cissus alone -8.8%, combination -11.9%), Nash/Oben 2019 (body fat -8.9 to -12.8%), and Youovop/Oben 2025 (body weight -5.8%) consistently report large weight loss, but all used raw material supplied by Gateway, include Oben as an author, and the 2025 study declared no conflicts despite funding from the 'J&A Oben Foundation.' (2) Independent research: Chatree 2021, with public funding and no conflicts, found no change in body weight or body-fat percentage, with only waist circumference -2.74cm (but n=30 small). Sawangjit 2017 meta-analysis found pooled weight effect -5.19kg (95% CI -8.82~-1.55), but this value pooled only combination products, and many pooled RCTs were from the same Oben/Gateway line; no subgroup analysis shows whether effects remain when only independent/high-quality trials are considered. The authors themselves wrote that high-quality research is still needed.

02

Why this is classified as D

D basis: human evidence exists, so not ? or F, but the key question is whether weight/body-fat reduction is confirmed in the no-conflict independent layer. Positive results concentrate in a single research group and raw-material supplier (Oben/Gateway), while the clearly independent Chatree 2021 trial found no change in body weight or body-fat percentage. Sawangjit 2017's -5.19kg is a pooled value for combination products and lacks funding-source subgroup analysis. Independent review Maunder 2020 judged herbal weight-loss evidence insufficient (supporting evidence, not direct disproof of cissus). Under methodology 2-1②, if meta-analysis is significant but independent RCT is null, D applies. Limitation: the independent negative RCT is one small study (n=30).

Counterpoint. Counterarguments are recorded. (1) Sawangjit 2017 meta-analysis shows a nontrivial pooled weight loss (-5.19kg) with CI not crossing 0. (2) Chatree 2021 had only 30 participants and may have lacked power to detect weight change; waist reduction and UCP1 mRNA increase (fat-browning mechanism marker) are metabolically favorable. (3) Maunder 2020 also stated that short-term safety appears acceptable. These counterarguments still do not answer the core question of whether weight effects are reproduced in independent, high-quality trials; that unresolved issue supports D.

Cross-check — Codex and Claude

This verdict was drafted by Codex through literature review and source-existence checks, cross-checked through blind grading and adversarial audit, and settled by reapplying the methodology boundary rules. Cases with split grades were resolved through rejudgment.
03

Evidence Table

StudyDesignSampleFundingEndpointResultWeight
Oben JE, Ngondi JL, Momo CN, Agbor GA, Makamto Sobgui CS 2008double-blind randomized controlled trial72possible manufacturer or industry involvementbody fat / body weight / ALT72 participants aged 21-44 in 10-week double-blind RCT. Cissus-alone arm (extract 150mg twice daily, standardized to 2.5% ketosteroids) showed weight -8.8% and body fat -14.6% (p<0.05); cissus+Irvingia arm showed weight -11.9% and body fat -20.0%. Test product supplied by Gateway Health Alliances (Fairfield, CA).key
Oben J, Kuate D, Agbor G, Momo C, Talla X 2006double-blind randomized controlled trial123possible manufacturer or industry involvementbody weight / ALT123 participants (92 obese, 31 overweight) in 8-week double-blind RCT. Test product was not cissus alone but combination Cylaris (cissus + soy albumin + green tea extract [EGCG/caffeine] + chromium + selenium + vitamin B). Combination group lost -6.6kg without diet to -8.1kg with diet vs placebo -2.3kg. Cissus extract supplied by Gateway Health Alliances; product manufactured by Protein Research Inc.key
Nash R, Azantsa B, Kuate D, Singh H, Oben J 2019double-blind randomized controlled trial67possible manufacturer or industry involvementbody fat / body weight / blood pressure / blood glucose67 overweight participants in 8-week double-blind pilot RCT. Commercial product CQR-300 300mg/day reduced body fat -8.9% (impedance) to -12.8% (DEXA), with waist, BP, lipids, and glucose improved. Funding listed as University of Yaounde I, but corresponding author Julius Oben.key
Chatree S, Sitticharoon C, Maikaew P, Pongwattanapakin K, Keadkraichaiwat I, Churintaraphan M et al. 2021double-blind randomized controlled trial30possible manufacturer or industry involvementbody fat / body weight30 Thai obese adults (15 per group), 8-week double-blind RCT, cissus 300mg twice daily. Body weight and body-fat percentage showed no significant change; only waist circumference decreased -2.74cm (p<0.05). Thailand Research Fund and Siriraj Hospital public funding; authors declared no conflicts.key
Sawangjit R, Puttarak P, Saokaew S, Chaiyakunapruk N 2017meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials9possible manufacturer or industry involvementbody weightMeta-analysis of 9 RCTs and 1,108 participants. Pooled weight reduction -5.19kg (95% CI -8.82~-1.55). However, the weight pooling was only for combination products, and the authors concluded that high-quality studies are still needed.supporting
Study 6double-blind randomized controlled trial248mixed or partly industry-relatedbody fat / body weight / ALT248 overweight/obese participants (228 completed) in double-blind RCT. Cissus 300mg/day reduced weight -5.8% and body fat -10.9% (placebo -0.7%), with oral semaglutide as parallel comparator. Funding J&A Oben Foundation, raw material Gateway Health Alliances, yet declared 'no conflicts.'supporting
Maunder A, Bessell E, Lauche R, Adams J, Sainsbury A, Fuller NR 2020meta-analysis of randomized controlled trialspossible manufacturer or industry involvementIndependent systematic review/meta-analysis of herbal weight-loss RCTs. Positive results for herbs including cissus were interpreted cautiously due to few studies, low methodological quality, and poor reporting; conclusion that evidence is insufficient to recommend any herbal medicine for weight loss.supporting
§

Receipt — 7 References

Every cited source was opened and checked against the live page on 2026-07-06.

Oben JE, Ngondi JL, Momo CN, Agbor GA, Makamto Sobgui CS. 2008. The use of a Cissus quadrangularis/Irvingia gabonensis combination in the management of weight loss: a double-blind placebo-controlled study. Lipids in Health and Disease; PMID 18072978 / PMC2330043.
checked
Oben J, Kuate D, Agbor G, Momo C, Talla X. 2006. The use of a Cissus quadrangularis formulation in the management of weight loss and metabolic syndrome. Lipids in Health and Disease; PMID 16948861 / PMC1570348.
checked
Nash R, Azantsa B, Kuate D, Singh H, Oben J. 2019. The Use of a Stem and Leaf Aqueous Extract of Cissus quadrangularis (CQR-300) to Reduce Body Fat and Other Components of Metabolic Syndrome in Overweight Participants. Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine; PMID 29912570.
checked
Reference 4
checked
Sawangjit R, Puttarak P, Saokaew S, Chaiyakunapruk N. 2017. Efficacy and Safety of Cissus quadrangularis L. in Clinical Use: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Phytotherapy Research; 31(4):555-567. PMID 28165166.
checked
Reference 6
checked
Maunder A, Bessell E, Lauche R, Adams J, Sainsbury A, Fuller NR. 2020. Effectiveness of herbal medicines for weight loss: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Diabetes, Obesity & Metabolism; PMID 31984610.
checked
Draft and rewrite: Codex (AI) · Verification: Codex blind grading and adversarial audit · Final adjudication: Claude
Reviewed and approved: Chamgap Editorial Team · Approval date: 2026-07-06 · Corrections: none

Cite this verdict

Cissus x diet Evidence Grade D card
[Chamgap] Cissus x diet — Evidence Grade D. 7 cited sources checked. Source: https://health-receipt.pages.dev/en/verdicts/weight/cissus-diet/ · CC BY 4.0

CC BY 4.0 — free to use with attribution; do not distort grades, numbers, or verdict meaning.

!

What this document does and does not do

Chamgap is an information source. It reports what research has and has not confirmed; it does not tell readers what to take or buy. That decision belongs to readers and, when needed, medical or legal professionals. This verdict reflects literature available up to the search date and may change as new research appears. Nothing here is medical advice.