Lopresti and colleagues asked whether a standardised Withania somnifera root extract could ease anxiety and stress in healthy adults, and whether it changed the hormones linked to the stress response.[1] The trial measured two kinds of outcome: rating scales for how participants felt, and blood levels of cortisol, DHEA-S and testosterone.[1] That makes it useful to formulators, because it shows where the evidence is strong and where it is weak.
Many brands quote this paper on packs and in sales decks, often with the wrong extract or dose attached. This article sets out what the trial actually tested and what it found. It also shows how later meta-analyses read the same question. It is a review of published research for product developers, not medical advice. For the wider market picture, see FRL’s overview of adaptogenic herbs in stress-support supplement brands.
The trial ran for 60 days and enrolled 60 healthy adults aged 18–65 (37 men and 23 women) at two centres in India, in Bhopal and Pune.[1] Participants were randomised to the extract or to a placebo of roasted rice powder in identical capsules, and neither participants nor investigators knew who took which.[1] The abstract describes participants as having “self-reported high stress”. The entry criterion, however, was a Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) score of 6–17, and the authors describe the group as mildly stressed.[1] The trial did not study people with a diagnosed anxiety disorder.
Participants took one 240 mg capsule of Shoden once daily after dinner.[1] Shoden is a root extract made with 70:30 ethanol:water and standardised by HPLC to not less than 35% withanolide glycosides, which is about 84 mg of withanolide glycosides per capsule.[1] The authors note that 240 mg is lower than the 600 mg dose used in most earlier ashwagandha trials.[1]
This is the most common error in how the paper is quoted. It is not a KSM-66 study. KSM-66 is a different branded root extract with its own specification and its own trials. A result from one extract cannot be moved to another.
Arjuna Natural Ltd, which makes Shoden, funded the trial and manufactured the capsules. The principal investigators declared no competing interests. The lead author reported past funding from the same company for unrelated studies.[1] Industry funding is common in botanical trials and does not invalidate a result. It should still be stated whenever the trial is used to support a product.
All 60 participants completed the trial, and no adverse events were reported.[1] Compared with placebo, the extract group had a significantly greater fall in HAM-A anxiety scores (P = .040). The difference in the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21) was not significant (P = .096).[1] Morning cortisol fell by 23% in the extract group against a 0.5% rise with placebo (P < .001 between groups), and DHEA-S also fell more with the extract (P = .004).[1]
The careful reading is a clear hormonal signal, a modest anxiety-scale signal and no significant effect on the broader stress questionnaire. That does not support a simple “reduces stress” headline. Within-group changes also need care: HAM-A fell by 41% with the extract, but it also fell by 24% with placebo.[1]
| Outcome | Result vs placebo | P value (time × group) |
|---|---|---|
| HAM-A (clinician-rated anxiety) | Significantly greater reduction | .040 |
| DASS-21 (depression, anxiety, stress) | Not significant (trend) | .096 |
| Morning serum cortisol | Significantly greater reduction | < .001 |
| DHEA-S | Significantly greater reduction | .004 |
| Testosterone, all participants | No significant difference | .150 |
| Testosterone, men only | Rose within the extract group (P = .038), but not significantly more than placebo | .158 |
Source: Lopresti et al. (2019).[1]
The strengths are a placebo control, double blinding, a named and specified extract, a single fixed dose and full completion.[1] The authors list the limitations themselves:[1]
The authors call for larger studies in different populations, over longer periods.[1] For a brand, the trial is one data point for one extract. It does not establish ashwagandha as a category.
Two recent meta-analyses pool several trials, and they show why the outcome must be named as well as the extract. A 2024 review of 9 randomised trials (558 participants) found lower Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) scores (mean difference −4.72), lower HAM-A anxiety (−2.19) and lower serum cortisol (−2.58) with ashwagandha than with placebo.[3] A 2025 review pooled 7 trials reporting cortisol and 6 reporting PSS (488 participants in total). It confirmed lower cortisol (−1.16 µg/dL, P < 0.001) but found no significant effect on perceived stress (P = 0.40).[2]
| Meta-analysis | Trials | Cortisol | Perceived stress (PSS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arumugam et al., 2024[3] | 9 RCTs, 558 participants | Mean difference −2.58 (serum) | Mean difference −4.72 |
| Albalawi, 2025[2] | 7 cortisol and 6 PSS trials, 488 participants | −1.16 µg/dL, P < 0.001 | No significant effect, P = 0.40 |
Both reviews pool different extracts, doses and durations, so neither can say which extract works best. The 2025 review included only trials using at least 250 mg a day,[2] so a 240 mg trial like Lopresti’s would not meet its dose criterion. Across both reviews, the cortisol evidence is more consistent than the perceived-stress evidence. In the 2024 review, four trials reported mild to moderate adverse events, and the authors say long-term safety needs more study.[3]
A clean 60-day trial does not settle long-term safety, and regulators have become more cautious since 2019.
India’s food regulator has also acted on plant part. On 16 April 2026, FSSAI issued an advisory that ashwagandha leaves may not be used in food products in crude, extract or any other form, and that only the roots and root extracts listed in Schedule IV of the 2016 nutraceutical regulations are permitted.[5] The Ministry of Ayush issued a root-only directive the day before, which trade press reports also asks for the plant part to be declared on the label.[9] On 12 May 2026, the Karnataka High Court reportedly stayed both directives for the eight companies that challenged them. The stay applied only to those petitioners, and a further hearing was listed for 8 June 2026.[10] Check the current status of the case before you rely on either position. For the regulatory detail, see FRL’s guide to FSSAI nutraceutical regulations and its explainer on AYUSH licence vs the FSSAI nutraceutical route. FRL’s Ayurvedic nutraceutical toxicity and safety guide covers contaminants and herb–drug interactions.
In herbal product development, a trial is a specification, not a slogan. In this trial, the extract (Shoden root extract, at least 35% withanolide glycosides), the dose (240 mg once daily), the duration (60 days) and the outcomes (HAM-A and morning cortisol) belong together.[1] If your extract, dose or format differs, this trial is not your evidence, and you need data for your own material.
The European Medicines Agency’s quality guideline for herbal medicinal products distinguishes three types of preparation. Standardised preparations are adjusted to constituents with known therapeutic activity. Quantified preparations are adjusted to active markers within a set range. All other preparations are defined by their production process and specification.[4] The guideline covers medicines, not foods, but its terms are useful for specifications. A withanolide assay gives you a measurable target. Confirm that your assay method and marker match those of the extract in the evidence you cite, because withanolide figures from different methods are not directly comparable.
Specify root on the purchase specification and the certificate of analysis, and record extraction solvent and ratio. Keep a supplier declaration that no leaf is present. Our worked example of a 240 mg ashwagandha root-extract capsule shows how these choices turn into a development file.
Formulator’s note. Whenever you cite a trial, write the extract name, daily dose and duration beside it. Match the outcome scale (HAM-A, DASS-21, PSS or cortisol) to the wording you plan to use. Never transfer a result from one extract to another.
The 2019 trial is a useful anchor, but it supports one extract at one dose over 60 days. Its clearest effects were on morning cortisol and clinician-rated anxiety, not on a general stress score. Read it alongside the later meta-analyses and the safety and regulatory signals above. Name the extract, and keep any wording within what your own evidence and the applicable regulations allow. Answers to common development questions are in FRL’s herbal product development Q&A.
Food Research Lab’s herbal formulation team helps brands choose an extract, set the dose and build the specification around the evidence they plan to cite. We compare supplier specifications (plant part, solvent, marker and assay method) with the trial material, then design the format and stability plan. Our regulatory and scientific research team checks your intended wording against the evidence and the FSSAI or AYUSH route that applies. See our wider herbal product development work.
Talk to a formulation expert about your ashwagandha product or contact our team.
In 60 mildly stressed, healthy adults, 240 mg a day of the Shoden root extract for 60 days reduced HAM-A anxiety scores (P = .040), morning cortisol (P < .001) and DHEA-S (P = .004) more than placebo. The DASS-21 difference was not significant (P = .096), and no adverse events were reported.[1]
One 240 mg capsule of Shoden, taken once daily after dinner for 60 days. The extract was standardised to at least 35% withanolide glycosides, about 84 mg per capsule.[1] That is lower than the 600 mg dose most earlier trials used.
No. It tested Shoden, a root extract made and supplied by Arjuna Natural Ltd, which also funded the trial.[1] KSM-66 is a different branded extract with its own trials. Do not cite this paper for a KSM-66 product.
Short trials such as this one reported few or no adverse events,[1][3] but there are case reports of liver injury,[7] and Germany’s BfR advises some groups to avoid ashwagandha supplements.[6] In India, FSSAI permits only roots and root extracts in food products.[5] Get safety and regulatory advice for your specific product and market.