ArticleJournal of cellular physiology2012
Orthopedic gene therapy--lost in translation?
Article in Journal of cellular physiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
24 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biologics for bone regeneration: advances in cell, protein, gene, and mRNA therapies.Bone research · 2026Review
- Engineering bone tissue with mRNA: from molecular design and delivery to clinical applications.Materials today (Kidlington, England) · 2025Article
- Therapeutic Controlled Release Strategies for Human Osteoarthritis.Advanced healthcare materials · 2025Review
- Lost in translation: the lack of agreement between surgeons and scientists regarding biomaterials research and innovation for treating bone defects.BMC medicine · 2024Article
- Advances in Human Mitochondria-Based Therapies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Orthopaedic Gene Therapy: Twenty-Five Years On.JBJS reviews · 2021Article
- Non-viral Gene Delivery Methods for Bone and Joints.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Review
- Tissue Engineering in Orthopaedics.The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume · 2016Review
- MicroRNAs and Bone Regeneration.Current genomics · 2015Article
- Chemically modified RNA activated matrices enhance bone regeneration.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2015Article
- Utilization of a genetically modified muscle flap for local BMP-2 production and its effects on bone healing: a histomorphometric and radiological study in a rat model.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2015Article
- Gene therapy approaches to regenerating the musculoskeletal system.Nature reviews. Rheumatology · 2015Review
- Biologics for tendon repair.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2015Review
- Spatial regulation of controlled bioactive factor delivery for bone tissue engineering.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2015Review
- Native, living tissues as cell seeded scaffolds.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2015Review
- Using genes to facilitate the endogenous repair and regeneration of orthopaedic tissues.International orthopaedics · 2014Review
- Arthritis gene therapy and its tortuous path into the clinic.Translational research : the journal of laboratory and clinical medicine · 2013Review
- Nonviral Gene Delivery of Growth and Differentiation Factor 5 to Human Mesenchymal Stem Cells Injected into a 3D Bovine Intervertebral Disc Organ Culture System.Stem cells international · 2013Article
- Novel approaches for treating musculoskeletal diseases: molecular orthopedics and systems medicine.The open orthopaedics journal · 2013Article
- Gene delivery to bone.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Orthopedic gene therapy has been the topic of considerable research for two decades. The preclinical data are impressive and many orthopedic conditions are well suited to genetic therapies. But there have been few clinical trials and no FDA-approved product exists. This paper examines why this is so. The reasons are multifactorial. Clinical translation is expensive and difficult to fund by traditional academic routes. Because gene therapy is viewed as unsafe and risky, it does not attract major funding from the pharmaceutical industry. Start-up companies are burdened by the complex intellectual property environment and difficulties in dealing with the technology transfer offices of major universities. Successful translation requires close interactions between scientists, clinicians and experts in regulatory and compliance issues. It is difficult to create such a favorable translational environment. Other promising fields of biological therapy have contemplated similar frustrations approximately 20 years after their founding, so there seem to be more general constraints on translation that are difficult to define. Gene therapy has noted some major clinical successes in recent years, and a sense of optimism is returning to the field. We hope that orthopedic applications will benefit collaterally from this upswing and move expeditiously into advanced clinical trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.