ArticleGenes & diseases2014
Constructing the toolbox: Patient-specific genetic factors of altered fracture healing.
Article in Genes & diseases, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bifidobacterium longum supplementation improves age-related delays in fracture repair.Aging cell · 2023Article
- Preclinical safety and efficacy of 24R,25-dihydroxyvitamin DJournal of orthopaedic translation · 2020Article
- Atrophic nonunion stromal cells form bone and recreate the bone marrow environment in vivo.OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma · 2018Article
- The genetics of bone mass and susceptibility to bone diseases.Nature reviews. Rheumatology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The multifaceted sequence of events that follow fracture repair can be further complicated when considering risk factors for impaired union, present in a large and growing percentage of the population. Risk factors such as diabetes, substance abuse, and poor nutrition affect both the young and old alike, and have been shown to dramatically impair the body's natural healing processes. To this end, biotherapeudic interventions such as ultrasound, electrical simulation, growth factor treatment (BMP-2, BMP-7, PDGF-BB, FGF-2) have been evaluated in preclinical models and in some cases are used widely for patients with established non-union or risk/indication or impaired healing (ie. ultrasound, BMP-2, etc.). Despite the promise of these interventions, they have been shown to be reliant on patient compliance and can produce adverse side-effects such as heterotopic ossification. Gene and cell therapy approaches have attempted to apply controlled regimens of these factors and have produced promising results. However, there are safety and efficacy concerns that may limit the translation of these approaches. In addition, none of the above mentioned approaches consider genetic variation between individual patients. Several clinical and preclinical studies have demonstrated a genetic component to fracture repair and that SNPs and genetic background variation play major roles in the determination of healing outcomes. Despite this, there is a need for preclinical data to dissect the mechanism underlying the influence of specific gene loci on the processes of fracture healing, which will be paramount in the future of patient-centered interventions for fracture repair.
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.