Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29298298›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Biomarkers for tissue engineering of the tendon-bone interface.

Lara A Kuntz, Leone Rossetti, Elena Kunold, Andreas Schmitt, Ruediger von Eisenhart-Rothe, Andreas R Bausch, Rainer H Burgkart

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. No healing improvement after rotator cuff reconstruction augmented with an autologous periosteal flap.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2019
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Lara A KuntzKlinik für Orthopädie und Sportorthopädie, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, München, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4942-7529
Leone RossettiLehrstuhl für Zellbiophysik, Technische Universität München, Garching, Germany.
Elena KunoldCenter for Integrated Protein Science (CIPSM), Department of Chemistry, Technische Universität München, Garching, Germany.
Andreas SchmittKlinik für Orthopädie und Sportorthopädie, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, München, Germany.
Ruediger von Eisenhart-RotheKlinik für Orthopädie und Sportorthopädie, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, München, Germany.
Andreas R BauschLehrstuhl für Zellbiophysik, Technische Universität München, Garching, Germany.
Rainer H BurgkartKlinik für Orthopädie und Sportorthopädie, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, München, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The tendon-bone interface (enthesis) is a highly sophisticated biomaterial junction that allows stress transfer between mechanically dissimilar materials. The enthesis encounters very high mechanical demands and the regenerative capacity is very low resulting in high rupture recurrence rates after surgery. Tissue engineering offers the potential to recover the functional integrity of entheses. However, recent enthesis tissue engineering approaches have been limited by the lack of knowledge about the cells present at this interface. Here we investigated the cellular differentiation of enthesis cells and compared the cellular pattern of enthesis cells to tendon and cartilage cells in a next generation sequencing transcriptome study. We integrated the transcriptome data with proteome data of a previous study to identify biomarkers of enthesis cell differentiation. Transcriptomics detected 34468 transcripts in total in enthesis, tendon, and cartilage. Transcriptome comparisons revealed 3980 differentially regulated candidates for enthesis and tendon, 395 for enthesis and cartilage, and 946 for cartilage and tendon. An asymmetric distribution of enriched genes was observed in enthesis and cartilage transcriptome comparison suggesting that enthesis cells are more chondrocyte-like than tenocyte-like. Integrative analysis of transcriptome and proteome data identified ten enthesis biomarkers and six tendon biomarkers. The observed gene expression characteristics and differentiation markers shed light into the nature of the cells present at the enthesis. The presented markers will foster enthesis tissue engineering approaches by setting a bench-mark for differentiation of seeded cells towards a physiologically relevant phenotype.

Indexed as

BiomarkersBone and BonesTendonsTissue EngineeringAnimalsHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingProteomeSwineTranscriptomeBiomarkersProteome

Identifiers

PMID29298298
PMCPMC5751986

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.