Dunn · Clinical psychology review 2022 · systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials · n=48 studies (4683 participants)

The effect of mindfulness-based interventions on immunity-related biomarkers: a comprehensive meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Cited 65 times in the scientific literature.

Level 1 - systematic review of randomized trials

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PubMed 35078038 · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2022.102124 · record verified 2026-08-30

What was done

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (searched via ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Academic Search Complete, AMED, MEDLINE, PsycARTICLES, and PsycINFO) evaluating the effect of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) on six immune-related biomarkers: CD4+ cells, C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), nuclear factor-κB (NF-κB), telomere length, and telomerase activity. Across 1,959 identified records, 48 RCTs with 70 effect sizes and 4,683 participants were included, analyzing post-intervention and follow-up effects.

What was found

At post-intervention, MBIs showed significant reductions in CRP (SMCD = -0.14, 95% CI [-0.26, -0.01]) and IL-6 (SMCD = -0.35, 95% CI [-0.67, -0.03]), and significant increases in telomere length (SMCD = 0.12, 95% CI [0.00, 0.24]) and telomerase activity (SMCD = 0.81, 95% CI [0.17, 1.46]). The change in CD4+ cells was not statistically significant (SMCD = 0.09, 95% CI [-0.05, 0.22]), and NF-κB figures were not reported in the abstract. At follow-up, CRP remained significantly reduced (SMCD = -0.39, 95% CI [-0.68, -0.10]), while reductions in IL-6 (SMCD = -0.13, 95% CI [-0.29, 0.03]) and increases in CD4+ (SMCD = 0.22, 95% CI [-0.08, 0.52]) were not statistically significant.

Why it matters

This review aggregates randomized trial evidence to demonstrate that mindfulness practices are associated with modest reductions in systemic inflammatory markers and increases in cellular longevity markers.

Limits

Most observed effect sizes were small (SMCD -0.14 to 0.12), and several confidence intervals spanned or bordered zero. The abstract notes significant heterogeneity across trials attributable to intervention dosage, target population, and trial design, but does not provide details on control types (active vs. inactive), clinical outcomes, or specific data for NF-κB.

Cited by