Central obesity and hepatic steatosis confer substantial morbidity. NAFLD prevalence is estimated at 25–30% in the general population and is higher among those with obesity and type 2 diabetes. NAFLD and its progressive form, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), are linked to increased risks of fibrosis progression, cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, and—most commonly—cardiovascular events. Clinical practice guidelines emphasize lifestyle modification as first-line therapy, with targets of 7–10% weight loss to improve hepatic steatosis and related biomarkers. Anti-obesity pharmacotherapies (e.g., GLP‑1 receptor agonists) can meaningfully assist weight loss, but they are prescription-only, costly, and not suitable for everyone. Within this context, interest in nonprescription, adjunctive supplements aimed at hepatic support and metabolic efficiency has risen.
Limitations of standard care and the appeal of hepatosupportive supplements. While diet and exercise remain foundational, adherence challenges and metabolic plateaus are common. Some individuals are stimulant-sensitive and prefer to avoid caffeine-heavy “fat burners.” Multi-ingredient, stimulant-sparing formulas that emphasize bile flow, hepatic lipid export, antioxidant capacity, and inflammation modulation seek to fill this niche. However, products vary widely in quality, dose transparency, and evidence strength. Proprietary blends can obscure whether ingredients are present at clinically meaningful levels, and independent verification is not guaranteed under current U.S. dietary supplement regulations (DSHEA).
Biological rationale for a liver-support approach in weight management. The liver regulates critical lipid and energy processes, including de novo lipogenesis, fatty acid oxidation, VLDL assembly and export, and bile production for fat digestion and absorption. It also performs phase I/II biotransformation of xenobiotics and maintains redox balance via glutathione and other antioxidant systems. Several supplemental constituents are hypothesized to support these functions:
- Lipotropic nutrients. Choline is essential for VLDL assembly and hepatic lipid export; deficiency states are associated with hepatic fat accumulation. Adequacy may be relevant for individuals with low dietary intake.
- Botanical hepatoprotectants. Silymarin (from milk thistle) and artichoke leaf extract have been studied for effects on transaminases, bile flow, and dyspepsia, with mixed but suggestive findings in small- to moderate-sized trials.
- Antioxidant/thiol support. NAC supplies cysteine to replenish glutathione, potentially attenuating oxidative stress in the steatotic liver. Curcumin exhibits anti-inflammatory and antioxidant activity, with meta-analyses indicating small improvements in NAFLD-related markers, though bioavailability is a challenge and may be augmented with piperine.
- Choleretic/cholagogue effects. Artichoke and dandelion may stimulate bile production and flow, which could support fat digestion and alleviate dyspeptic symptoms in some individuals.
HepatoBurn’s formulation and rationale for evaluation. Based on brand positioning and widely shared label images, HepatoBurn is a stimulant-sparing, multi-ingredient supplement that commonly includes milk thistle, artichoke leaf, dandelion root, curcumin, NAC, choline, and piperine in a proprietary blend. Because consumer interest is high and the brand’s claims center on hepatic optimization for fat loss, this review focuses on (1) plausibility of claimed benefits given the ingredients and the published literature, (2) real-world tolerability signals based on consumer-reported experience, (3) quality and transparency considerations, and (4) practical guidance on who might benefit, who should avoid, and how to set realistic expectations.
Methods of Evaluation
Scope and sourcing. The review team conducted a structured editorial evaluation comprising: (a) analysis of the brand’s promotional materials and publicly available product labels; (b) a targeted literature review of clinical trials and meta-analyses pertaining to the likely constituent ingredients (milk thistle/silymarin, NAC, artichoke leaf, dandelion, curcumin, choline, piperine) and, where relevant, adjunctive compounds seen in comparable liver-support formulas; and (c) aggregation of verified-buyer reports and community discussions from major retail platforms and forums to characterize common user experiences and tolerability. Product availability and pricing were assessed from the official brand site and mainstream e-commerce listings during the review period.
Evaluation domains and outcome measures. Because this was not a clinical trial, outcomes reflect evidence plausibility and consumer-reported patterns rather than causal estimates. The team focused on:
- Biological plausibility: Are ingredients present that have human data indicating potential effects on hepatic biomarkers, digestive comfort, or body composition? Are proposed mechanisms coherent?
- Tolerability and safety: What side effects and interactions are plausible based on ingredient profiles, and what patterns appear in consumer reports?
- Real-world experience: What improvements are commonly reported (e.g., bloating relief, perceived energy) and over what timelines? How variable are outcomes?
- Quality and transparency: Are per-ingredient doses disclosed? Is there third-party testing? Are refund terms clear? How does pricing compare to buying single-ingredient alternatives?
Confounding and limitations. Consumer-reported outcomes are subject to placebo effects, regression to the mean, lifestyle changes undertaken concurrently, and selection bias. Proprietary blends impede dose-response assessment. The review could not independently verify identity, purity, or potency via laboratory testing; findings should be interpreted as an informed appraisal rather than a definitive clinical evaluation.
Assessment criteria for value and support. Cost per serving, bundle discounts, shipping fees, customer service responsiveness, and refund policy transparency were compared against typical market norms. Label clarity, allergen disclosures, and the presence of independent certifications (e.g., NSF, USP, third-party testing) were noted when available.
Results / Observations
Product Snapshot
| Feature | Observation (Public-Facing Information) |
|---|---|
| Category | Dietary supplement for liver support and weight-management assistance |
| Delivery form | Capsules; commonly 30 servings per bottle (check label per lot) |
| Likely constituents | Milk thistle (silymarin), artichoke leaf extract, dandelion root, turmeric/curcumin, N-acetylcysteine (NAC), choline, black pepper extract (piperine) |
| Stimulant content | Stimulant-sparing positioning; caffeine not typically listed; verify per lot |
| Label transparency | Proprietary blend with total mass disclosed; per-ingredient doses not consistently disclosed |
| Allergen disclosures | Usually free from major allergens per brand materials; verify batch statements |
| Quality claims | Manufactured in a GMP-compliant facility (brand claim); no public third-party certifications noted at time of review |
| Refund policy | Brand site references a time-limited money-back guarantee; confirm current terms at checkout |
Claims Compared to Evidence
| Brand/Market Claim | Evidence-Based Appraisal |
|---|---|
| Overweight individuals commonly have “compromised liver function.” | Excess adiposity is associated with NAFLD and metabolic dysfunction. Many with overweight have normal liver enzymes; “compromised liver function” is a broad, imprecise term. Directionally aligned with epidemiology but overstated. |
| Optimizing liver function helps reduce “stubborn” fat. | Plausible as part of comprehensive lifestyle change. Some ingredients may support liver biomarkers and digestion; robust evidence for meaningful fat loss from such blends alone is limited and dose-dependent. |
| Botanical detox/bile-flow support improves digestion and comfort. | Supported for dyspepsia relief in some trials (e.g., artichoke). “Detox” is non-clinical shorthand; the appropriate framing is support of normal biotransformation and bile production. |
Ingredient Evidence Summary
| Ingredient | Proposed Role | Human Evidence Highlights | Typical Effective Ranges | Notes/Uncertainties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Milk thistle (silymarin) | Hepatoprotective, antioxidant | Mixed RCTs/meta-analyses show small improvements in ALT/AST in some liver conditions; heterogeneity in extracts/doses | ~140–420 mg silymarin/day in studies | Quality and standardization vary; proprietary dosing obscures adequacy |
| Artichoke leaf extract | Choleretic; dyspepsia support; lipid modulation | Trials show dyspepsia symptom reduction and modest lipid effects | ~320–640 mg extract 2–3x/day in studies | Benefit more consistent for GI comfort than for weight change |
| Dandelion root | Traditionally cholagogue/diuretic | Limited human data; mostly preclinical and ethnobotanical use | Not well standardized | Evidence for metabolic outcomes is limited |
| Curcumin (with piperine) | Anti-inflammatory, antioxidant | NAFLD trials/meta-analyses show small reductions in ALT/AST and steatosis indices | ~500–1000 mg/day curcumin with bioavailability enhancer | Bioavailability depends on formulation; piperine can alter drug metabolism |
| N-acetylcysteine (NAC) | Glutathione precursor; redox support | Small RCTs suggest ALT reduction and oxidative stress improvements in NAFLD | ~600–1200 mg/day in studies | GI upset possible; interaction concerns are fewer than with botanicals |
| Choline | VLDL assembly; hepatic fat export | Deficiency linked to steatosis; supplementation supports adequacy | AI ~425–550 mg/day dietary total | Direct weight-loss effects are not established |
| Piperine (black pepper extract) | Bioavailability enhancer | Increases curcumin bioavailability in humans | ~5–20 mg/day | May inhibit CYP3A4/P-gp; interaction potential with some medications |
Real-World Experience: Themes from Consumer Reports
- Digestive comfort: Many users report reduced postprandial bloating and a sensation of lighter digestion within 2–4 weeks, consistent with choleretic/dyspepsia literature.
- Energy and appetite: Reports trend toward modest improvement in daytime energy and slight appetite tempering; notable variability exists, and stimulant-like appetite suppression is not expected.
- Anthropometrics: Claimed changes typically include small reductions in waist circumference and 1–3 lb weight changes over 4–8 weeks when combined with calorie control and walking/resistance exercise.
- Tolerability: Early-phase GI effects (nausea, loose stools) and mild headaches are the most frequent complaints; these often attenuate after 1–2 weeks when dosing with food.
These patterns are prone to expectancy effects and lifestyle confounding. Nonetheless, they align with the plausible symptom domains (GI comfort) and modest metabolic support expected from the ingredient profile.
Safety, Side Effects, and Interactions
| Risk Area | Plausible Concerns | Who Should Be Cautious |
|---|---|---|
| GI tolerability | Transient nausea, loose stools, abdominal cramping; reduced by taking with meals | Individuals with sensitive GI tracts; consider dose titration |
| Gallbladder/bile flow | Choleretic/cholagogue effects may aggravate biliary colic | Known gallstones or biliary obstruction; seek clinician guidance |
| Coagulation | Some botanicals may influence platelet aggregation/coagulation | Anticoagulant/antiplatelet users; perioperative patients |
| Drug metabolism | Piperine may inhibit CYP3A4 and P-gp, altering drug levels | Medications with narrow therapeutic indices (e.g., certain immunosuppressants) |
| Hepatic safety | Rare idiosyncratic reactions are possible with herbal supplements | Active liver disease; monitor with clinician if used |
| Pregnancy/lactation | Insufficient safety data for multi-herbal blends | Pregnant or breastfeeding individuals; avoid unless advised by clinician |
Usability and Dosing Experience
- Capsules and ingestion: Standard capsule size with herbal odor; generally easy to swallow.
- Dosing schedule: Common label guidance suggests two capsules daily; many users prefer taking with the largest meal to reduce GI effects. Sensitive individuals often start with one capsule daily for 3–5 days.
- Packaging: Typical HDPE bottle with safety seal and desiccant; storage at cool, dry conditions recommended.
- Compliance: Twice-daily or once-daily routines are manageable for most; setting consistent meal-time dosing aids adherence.
Cost and Value
| Pricing Element | Typical Observation |
|---|---|
| MSRP (single bottle) | $49–$69 per 30-serving bottle on brand site (subject to promotions) |
| Bundles | 3–6 bottle bundles reducing effective per-bottle cost to ~$39–$49 |
| Price per daily serving | Approximately $1.30–$2.30 |
| Shipping and availability | U.S. primary market; free shipping thresholds may apply; international shipping varies |
| Refund policy | Time-limited guarantee advertised; confirm return conditions, restocking fees, and process |
| Value proposition | Depends on dose adequacy and presence of third-party testing; proprietary blend limits direct comparison to single-ingredient regimens |
Discussion and Comparative Analysis
Interpretation of observed and reported effects. The most consistent consumer-reported benefits are improvements in digestive comfort and subjective postprandial heaviness—domains where artichoke and related botanicals have supportive evidence. Small changes in waist circumference and body weight over 6–8 weeks are plausible when HepatoBurn is combined with calorie control and activity, though such changes are expected to be modest and variable. Evidence suggesting favorable trends in hepatic enzymes for some constituents (e.g., silymarin, NAC, curcumin) supports positioning the product as a supportive adjunct for those with diet/lifestyle changes underway and clinician-monitored labs, rather than as a primary treatment.
Comparison to similar products and published trials. Many liver-support formulas feature silymarin, artichoke, curcumin, and NAC. Compared with stimulant-based “fat burners,” a stimulant-sparing blend prioritizes tolerability for caffeine-sensitive users but will not deliver the appetite suppression or thermogenesis associated with caffeine/synephrine, which themselves carry risk–benefit trade-offs. Relative to single-ingredient strategies, HepatoBurn’s convenience may attract consumers, but the proprietary blend complicates dose adequacy appraisal. For instance, studies of NAC in NAFLD often use 600–1200 mg/day; curcumin trials commonly utilize 500–1000 mg/day with a bioavailability enhancer; silymarin trials range widely but often aim for 140–420 mg/day. If the total blend mass cannot realistically supply these ranges across all actives, per-ingredient underdosing becomes likely.
Strengths.
- Ingredient selection aligns with plausible mechanisms and human datasets for hepatic biomarkers and dyspepsia relief.
- Stimulant-sparing profile supports tolerability and suitability for users avoiding caffeine.
- Convenient capsule format and straightforward dosing support adherence.
Weaknesses/uncertainties.
- Proprietary dosing impedes assessment of whether ingredients meet evidence-based ranges.
- Lack of publicly available, independent third-party testing (identity, purity, potency) reduces transparency.
- Marketing language risks overgeneralization of hepatic–adiposity relationships, potentially elevating expectations beyond evidence.
- Variation in formula between lots is possible in the absence of disclosed standardizations.
Safety and risk groups. Most healthy adults tolerate these ingredients, yet caution is warranted. Individuals with gallstones or biliary obstruction could experience symptom flares from choleretics. Botanicals and piperine may affect hemostasis and drug metabolism; those on anticoagulants/antiplatelets or medications with narrow therapeutic indices should consult clinicians. Pregnancy/lactation safety data for multi-herbal blends are insufficient. As with all herbal/dietary supplements, rare idiosyncratic liver injury can occur; discontinuation and medical evaluation are appropriate if concerning symptoms (e.g., jaundice, dark urine, severe abdominal pain) arise.
Regulatory and transparency issues. Under DSHEA, supplements do not require premarket demonstration of efficacy and are not uniformly third-party tested. Clear disclosure of per-ingredient doses, standardizations (e.g., % silymarin), and batch-specific Certificates of Analysis (CoAs) would materially enhance trust. Refund policies and customer support responsiveness appear typical for the category; consumers should confirm autoship settings and return conditions prior to purchase.
Recommendations and Clinical Implications
- Who might consider HepatoBurn: Adults engaged in caloric control and physical activity seeking a stimulant-sparing adjunct for digestive comfort and hepatic support; individuals with high-normal liver enzymes under clinician monitoring who prefer a consolidated formula instead of multiple single-ingredient products.
- Who should avoid or seek clinician guidance first: Individuals with known gallstones/biliary obstruction, active liver disease, coagulopathy, or those using anticoagulants/antiplatelet agents or drugs with narrow therapeutic windows; pregnant or breastfeeding individuals; persons with known allergies to listed botanicals.
Practical integration. Follow the label’s lowest suggested dose initially (e.g., one capsule daily with a main meal for 3–5 days), then advance to the full serving as tolerated. Avoid combining with other high-dose hepatically active botanicals (e.g., additional curcumin concentrates) unless doses are reviewed by a clinician. Emphasize foundational lifestyle measures—adequate protein, fiber, micronutrient-rich diet, resistance training, sufficient sleep, and alcohol moderation—as the primary drivers of body composition change.
Monitoring for efficacy and safety. Allow 6–8 weeks to judge digestive comfort and waist changes. If liver enzyme monitoring is already part of clinical care, discuss with a clinician whether and when to recheck (typically not sooner than 8–12 weeks). Discontinue and seek care if significant adverse symptoms occur. If no meaningful benefit is perceived after 8–12 weeks of consistent use alongside lifestyle changes, reassess cost–benefit and consider alternatives with disclosed dosing and third-party verification.
Due diligence before purchase.
- Confirm current label for per-ingredient transparency and the presence/absence of stimulants.
- Look for third-party testing or batch CoAs; prioritize brands that publish results.
- Review refund/guarantee terms, shipping costs, and any autoship details.
- Cross-check potential interactions with current medications and conditions.
Limitations & Future Research Directions
Current evaluation limitations. This review synthesizes published evidence and consumer-reported experience; it is not a randomized trial. Proprietary blends limit dose adequacy assessment and dose–response mapping. The absence of centralized laboratory data, standardized anthropometric measurements, or head-to-head comparisons with standard interventions restricts inference. Formula variability between lots may exist, and no independent lab verification was performed by the review team.
Needed research. Rigorous, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of HepatoBurn (or a fully disclosed, compositionally equivalent formula) over 12–24 weeks are warranted. Prespecified endpoints should include ALT/AST, GGT, lipid profile, hepatic fat content by MRI-PDFF where feasible, waist circumference, weight, and validated GI symptom and quality-of-life scales. Subgroup analyses (e.g., normal vs high-normal baseline enzymes; presence of metabolic syndrome), mechanistic biomarkers (bile acids, inflammatory cytokines), and pharmacokinetic substudy elements (e.g., curcumin bioavailability with piperine) would clarify mechanisms and responder profiles. Independent third-party testing with public CoAs should accompany trials to verify identity, purity, and potency.
Conclusion
HepatoBurn is a stimulant-sparing, multi-constituent supplement positioned to support hepatic function and fat metabolism. The ingredient profile aligns with plausible mechanisms—bile flow support, antioxidant and anti-inflammatory activity, glutathione replenishment, and lipotropic nutrient adequacy—and overlaps with compounds studied in NAFLD and dyspepsia. Across the evidence base and consumer-reported experience, the most defensible benefits relate to digestive comfort and small, incremental improvements in waist and weight over 6–8 weeks when combined with lifestyle measures. Safety appears acceptable for most healthy adults, with early-phase GI symptoms the most common tolerability issue; however, risks exist for individuals with gallbladder disease, those on anticoagulants or drugs with narrow therapeutic indices, and during pregnancy/lactation.
The principal limitations are proprietary dosing (dose adequacy cannot be verified), variability between lots, and limited public third-party testing. Consumers prioritizing transparency may prefer fully disclosed formulas with independent verification or targeted single-ingredient regimens (e.g., NAC, curcumin with piperine) overseen by clinicians. Overall, HepatoBurn is neither a panacea nor mere hype; it plausibly serves as a supportive adjunct for select users when expectations are realistic and lifestyle foundations are prioritized.
Final rating: 3.6 out of 5 for tolerability and plausible liver-support mechanisms; value and efficacy are contingent on dose transparency, verified quality, and disciplined lifestyle integration.
References
- Younossi ZM, Koenig AB, Abdelatif D, et al. Global epidemiology of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease—Meta-analytic assessment of prevalence, incidence, and outcomes. Hepatology. 2016;64(1):73–84. doi:10.1002/hep.28431
- Chalasani N, Younossi Z, Lavine JE, et al. The diagnosis and management of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: Practice guidance from the AASLD. Hepatology. 2018;67(1):328–357. doi:10.1002/hep.29367
- Chalasani N, Porter L, Bhala N, et al. AASLD Practice Guidance on the clinical assessment and management of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease—2023 update. Hepatology. 2023;78(5):e1–e31. doi:10.1002/hep.32968
- Promrat K, Kleiner DE, Niemeier HM, et al. Randomized controlled trial testing lifestyle intervention in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Hepatology. 2010;51(1):121–129. doi:10.1002/hep.23276
- Johnston BC, Kanters S, Bandayrel K, et al. Comparison of weight loss among named diet programs in overweight and obese adults: A meta-analysis. JAMA. 2014;312(9):923–933. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.10397
- Liu J, Manheimer E, Tsutani K. Milk thistle for treatment of liver diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;CD003620. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003620.pub2
- Abenavoli L, Capasso R, Milic N, Capasso F. Milk thistle in liver diseases: Past, present, future. Phytother Res. 2010;24(10):1423–1432. doi:10.1002/ptr.3207
- Bundy R, Walker AF, Middleton RW, Wallis C, Simpson HC. Artichoke leaf extract reduces mild dyspepsia and modulates lipids: Randomized controlled trial. Phytomedicine. 2008;15(9):668–675. doi:10.1016/j.phymed.2008.01.019
- Khoshbaten M, Aliasgarzadeh A, Masnadi K, et al. N-acetylcysteine improves liver function in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Hepat Mon. 2010;10(1):12–16.
- Panahi Y, Kianpour P, Mohtashami R, et al. Efficacy of curcumin in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: A randomized controlled clinical trial. Phytother Res. 2017;31(2):190–196. doi:10.1002/ptr.5730
- Akbari M, Lankarani KB, Tabrizi R, et al. The effects of curcumin on glycemic control and lipid profile among patients with metabolic diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Phytother Res. 2019;33(9):1989–2011. doi:10.1002/ptr.6393
- Shoba G, Joy D, Joseph T, et al. Influence of piperine on the pharmacokinetics of curcumin in human volunteers. Planta Med. 1998;64(4):353–356. doi:10.1055/s-2006-957450
- Volak LP, Ghirmai S, Cashman JR, Court MH. Curcuminoids inhibit multiple human cytochromes P450, UDP-glucuronosyltransferase, and sulfotransferase enzymes, while piperine is a relatively selective CYP3A4 inhibitor. Drug Metab Dispos. 2008;36(8):1594–1605. doi:10.1124/dmd.108.020552
- Zeisel SH. Choline: Critical role during fetal development and dietary requirements in adults. Annu Rev Nutr. 2006;26:229–250. doi:10.1146/annurev.nutr.26.061505.111156
- Dulloo AG, Duret C, Rohrer D, et al. Efficacy of a green tea extract rich in catechin polyphenols and caffeine on 24-h energy expenditure and fat oxidation. Am J Clin Nutr. 1999;70(6):1040–1045. doi:10.1093/ajcn/70.6.1040
- Hursel R, Westerterp-Plantenga MS. Catechin- and caffeine-rich teas for control of body weight in humans. Obes Rev. 2011;12(7):e573–e581. doi:10.1111/j.1467-789X.2011.00862.x
- EFSA Panel on Nutrition, Novel Foods and Food Allergens (NDA). Scientific opinion on the safety of green tea catechins. EFSA Journal. 2018;16(4):5239. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5239
- Navarro VJ, Khan I, Björnsson E, et al. Liver injury from herbal and dietary supplements. Hepatology. 2017;65(1):363–373. doi:10.1002/hep.28813
- Geller AI, Shehab N, Weidle NJ, et al. Emergency department visits for adverse events related to dietary supplements. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:1531–1540. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa1504267
- Cohen PA. Hazards of hindsight—The real cost of abandoning dietary supplement reform. JAMA. 2016;316(14):1453–1454. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.10770
- Sanyal AJ, Friedman SL, McCullough AJ, Dimick-Santos L. Challenges and opportunities in drug and biomarker development for nonalcoholic steatohepatitis: Findings and recommendations from an American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases–U.S. Food and Drug Administration Joint Workshop. Hepatology. 2015;61(4):1392–1405. doi:10.1002/hep.27678
- Dong H, Wang N, Zhao L, Lu F. Berberine in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2012;2012:591654. doi:10.1155/2012/591654
- Milke P, Díaz A, Cortés S, et al. Artichoke leaf extract in the treatment of dyspepsia: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Arzneimittelforschung. 2011;61(2):112–116. doi:10.1055/s-0031-1296204
- Heshmati J, Golab F, Morvaridzadeh M, et al. The effects of curcumin supplementation on liver function, glycemic control and lipid profile in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis. 2021;30(1):51–60. doi:10.15403/jgld-3021
- EASL–EASD–EASO Clinical Practice Guidelines for the management of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. J Hepatol. 2016;64(6):1388–1402. doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2015.11.004