ReviewThe Journal of craniofacial surgery2012
Gene therapy: implications for craniofacial regeneration.
Review in The Journal of craniofacial surgery, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Novel Gene Therapy Approaches for Targeting Neurodegenerative Disorders: Focusing on Delivering Neurotrophic Genes.Molecular neurobiology · 2025Review
- Temporomandibular Joint Regenerative Medicine.International journal of molecular sciences · 2018Review
- Biomaterials for Craniofacial Bone Regeneration.Dental clinics of North America · 2017Review
- Stem cells, growth factors and scaffolds in craniofacial regenerative medicine.Genes & diseases · 2016Article
- Dental and Nondental Stem Cell Based Regeneration of the Craniofacial Region: A Tissue Based Approach.Stem cells international · 2016Review
- Current concepts of bone tissue engineering for craniofacial bone defect repair.Craniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction · 2015Review
- Tissue-engineered mandibular bone reconstruction for continuity defects: a systematic approach to the literature.Tissue engineering. Part B, Reviews · 2014Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Gene therapy in the craniofacial region provides a unique tool for delivery of DNA to coordinate protein production in both time and space. The drive to bring this technology to the clinic is derived from the fact that more than 85% of the global population may at one time require repair or replacement of a craniofacial structure. This need ranges from mild tooth decay and tooth loss to temporomandibular joint disorders and large-scale reconstructive surgery. Our ability to insert foreign DNA into a host cell has been developing since the early uses of gene therapy to alter bacterial properties for waste cleanup in the 1980s followed by successful human clinical trials in the 1990s to treat severe combined immunodeficiency. In the past 20 years, the emerging field of craniofacial tissue engineering has adopted these techniques to enhance regeneration of mineralized tissues, salivary gland, and periodontium and to reduce tumor burden of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Studies are currently pursuing research on both biomaterial-mediated gene delivery and more clinically efficacious, although potentially more hazardous, viral methods. Although hundreds of gene therapy clinical trials have taken place in the past 20 years, we must still work to ensure an ideal safety profile for each gene and delivery method combination. With adequate genotoxicity testing, we can expect gene therapy to augment protein delivery strategies and potentially allow for tissue-specific targeting, delivery of multiple signals, and increased spatial and temporal control with the goal of natural tissue replacement in the craniofacial complex.
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.