Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36031459›Full record

ArticleBiomaterials2022

The use of heparin/polycation coacervate sustain release system to compare the bone regenerative potentials of 5 BMPs using a critical sized calvarial bone defect model.

Xueqin Gao, Mintai P Hwang, Nathaniel Wright, Aiping Lu, Joseph J Ruzbarsky, Matthieu Huard, Haizi Cheng, Michael Mullen, Sudheer Ravuri, Bing Wang and 2 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomaterials, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Targeting cellular senescence in dystrophinPharmacological research · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Stem Cells and Bone Tissue Engineering.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Xueqin GaoLinda and Mitch Hart Center for Regenerative and Personalized Medicine, Steadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO, 81657, USA.
Mintai P HwangMeinig School of Biomedical Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA.
Nathaniel WrightMeinig School of Biomedical Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA.
Aiping LuLinda and Mitch Hart Center for Regenerative and Personalized Medicine, Steadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO, 81657, USA.
Joseph J RuzbarskyLinda and Mitch Hart Center for Regenerative and Personalized Medicine, Steadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO, 81657, USA.
Matthieu HuardLinda and Mitch Hart Center for Regenerative and Personalized Medicine, Steadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO, 81657, USA.
Haizi ChengDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, McGovern Medical School, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, USA.
Michael MullenLinda and Mitch Hart Center for Regenerative and Personalized Medicine, Steadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO, 81657, USA.
Sudheer RavuriLinda and Mitch Hart Center for Regenerative and Personalized Medicine, Steadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO, 81657, USA.
Bing WangDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, USA.
Yadong WangMeinig School of Biomedical Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA. Electronic address: yw839@cornell.edu.
Johnny HuardLinda and Mitch Hart Center for Regenerative and Personalized Medicine, Steadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO, 81657, USA. Electronic address: jhuard@sprivail.org.
Steadman Philippon Research Institute · USCornell University · USThe University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston · USUniversity of Pittsburgh · US

Funding

Extended Release of Bioactive Factors to Treat Refractory WoundsR01NR016436 · NINR · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI WANG, YADONG · 2016 to 2020
$2.0M
The Use of Coacervate Technology as a New Drug Delivery System for MusculoskeletaR21AR066206 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR HOUSTON · PI HUARD, JOHNNY · 2014 to 2015
$372k
NIAMS NIH HHS R21 AR066206NINR NIH HHS R01 NR016436
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nonunion following bone fracture and segmental bone defects are challenging clinical conditions. To combat this clinical dilemma, development of new bone tissue engineering therapies using biocompatible materials to deliver bone growth factors is desirable. This aim of this study is to use a heparin/polycation coacervate sustained-release platform to compare 5 bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs) for promoting bone defect healing in a critical sized calvarial defect model. The in vitro 3D osteogenic pellet cultures assays demonstrated that BMPs 2, 4, 6, 7 and 9 all enhanced mineralization in vitro compared to the control group. BMP2 resulted in higher mineralized volume than BMP4 and BMP6. All BMPs and the control group activated the pSMAD5 signaling pathway and expressed osterix (OSX). The binding of BMP2 with coacervate significantly increased the coacervate average particle size. BMP2, 4, 6, & 7 bound to coacervate significantly increased the Zeta potential of the coacervate while BMP9 binding showed insignificant increase. Furthermore, using a monolayer culture osteogenic assay, it was found that hMDSCs cultured in the coacervate BMP2 osteogenic medium expressed higher levels of RUNX2, OSX, ALP and COX-2 compared to the control and BMPs 4, 6, 7 & 9. Additionally, the coacervate complex can be loaded with up to 2 μg of BMP proteins for sustained release. In vivo, when BMPs were delivered using the coacervate sustained release system, BMP2 was identified to be the most potent BMP promoting bone regeneration and regenerated 10 times of new bone than BMPs 4, 6 & 9. BMP7 also stimulated robust bone regeneration when compared to BMPs 4, 6 & 9. The quality of the newly regenerated bone by all BMPs delivered by coacervate is equivalent to the host bone consisting of bone matrix and bone marrow with normal bone architecture. Although the defect was not completely healed at 6 weeks, coacervate sustain release BMPs, particularly BMP2 and BMP7, could represent a new strategy for treatment of bone defects and non-unions.

Indexed as

Bone Morphogenetic Protein 2HeparinBone Morphogenetic ProteinsBone RegenerationDelayed-Action PreparationsOsteogenesisPolyelectrolytesBone Morphogenetic Protein 2Bone Morphogenetic ProteinsDelayed-Action PreparationsHeparinPolyelectrolytesBone morphogenetic proteinsBone tissue engineeringCritical sized calvarial bone defectHeparin/PEAD coacervateSustained release

Identifiers

PMID36031459
PMCPMC10129760
OpenAlexW4291302483

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.