ReviewNPJ Regenerative medicine2018
The impact of immune response on endochondral bone regeneration.
Review in NPJ Regenerative medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.
- Regulating Cells Fate and Function to Facilitate Bone Regeneration via Designing Programmable Bio-Interactive Materials.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Early Biological Orchestration in Fracture Healing: Decoding the Crosstalk between Inflammation, Coagulation, and Metabolism.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2026Review
- Article
- Pediatric physeal repair: from immune-angiogenic-osteogenic coupling to zonal biomimetic scaffolds.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
- Exosomes as Precise Regulators of the Osteoimmune Microenvironment: Engineering Strategies for Bone Regeneration.Biomaterials research · 2026Review
- Long-term tissue engineered periosteum-mediated allograft healing is hindered due to persistent fibrosis and limited allograft remodeling.Bone reports · 2025Article
- Novel Nanomaterials for Developing Bone Scaffolds and Tissue Regeneration.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Association between Sjögren syndrome and osteoporosis: A bidirectional Mendelian randomization study.Medicine · 2025Article
- Modulating immune-stem cell crosstalk enables robust bone regeneration via tuning compositions of macroporous scaffolds.NPJ Regenerative medicine · 2025Article
- Callus organoids reveal distinct cartilage to bone transition mechanisms across donors and a role for biological sex.Bone research · 2025Article
- Unraveling devitalization: its impact on immune response and ectopic bone remodeling from autologous and allogeneic callus mimics.Stem cells translational medicine · 2024Article
- Stem Cells in Bone Tissue Engineering: Progress, Promises and Challenges.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2024Review
- Low-Temperature Calcium Phosphate Ceramics Can Modulate Monocytes and Macrophages Inflammatory Response In Vitro.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- Optimization of 3D autologous chondrocyte-seeded polyglycolic acid scaffolds to mimic human ear cartilage.Biomaterials science · 2023Article
- Rationally designed bioactive milk-derived protein scaffolds enhanced new bone formation.Bioactive materials · 2023Article
- Editorial: The immune system and inflammation in musculoskeletal health, aging, and disease.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Article
- Injectable decellularized cartilage matrix hydrogel encapsulating urine-derived stem cells for immunomodulatory and cartilage defect regeneration.NPJ Regenerative medicine · 2022Article
- Beneficial roles of the AhR ligand FICZ on the regenerative potentials of BMSCs and primed cartilage templates.RSC advances · 2022Article
- Transcriptome Analysis Revealed the Symbiosis Niche of 3D Scaffolds to Accelerate Bone Defect Healing.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2022Article
- Acceleration of Bone Regeneration Induced by a Soft-Callus Mimetic Material.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tissue engineered cartilage substitutes, which induce the process of endochondral ossification, represent a regenerative strategy for bone defect healing. Such constructs typically consist of multipotent mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) forming a cartilage template in vitro, which can be implanted to stimulate bone formation in vivo. The use of MSCs of allogeneic origin could potentially improve the clinical utility of the tissue engineered cartilage constructs in three ways. First, ready-to-use construct availability can speed up the treatment process. Second, MSCs derived and expanded from a single donor could be applied to treat several patients and thus the costs of the medical interventions would decrease. Finally, it would allow more control over the quality of the MSC chondrogenic differentiation. However, even though the envisaged clinical use of allogeneic cell sources for bone regeneration is advantageous, their immunogenicity poses a significant obstacle to their clinical application. The aim of this review is to increase the awareness of the role played by immune cells during endochondral ossification, and in particular during regenerative strategies when the immune response is altered by the presence of implanted biomaterials and/or cells. More specifically, we focus on how this balance between immune response and bone regeneration is affected by the implantation of a cartilaginous tissue engineered construct of allogeneic origin.
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.