ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2024
Recombinant fibrous protein biomaterials meet skin tissue engineering.
Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biomimetic Dermal Substitutes for Skin Reconstruction: Advances in Scaffold Design, Biological Integration, and Clinical Performance.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
- Decellularized Extracellular Matrix (dECM) in Tendon Regeneration: A Comprehensive Review.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Review
- Construction and expression of recombinant human elastin with biological activities: effect of wound healingFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Technological Advances in Anti-hair Loss and Hair Regrowth Cosmeceuticals: Mechanistic Breakthroughs and Industrial Prospects Driven by Multidisciplinary Collaborative Innovation.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2025Review
- Gynecologic postoperative anti-adhesion barriers: From biomaterials to barrier development.Biomaterials and biosystems · 2025Review
- Sustainable Hydrogels for Medical Applications: Biotechnological Innovations Supporting One Health.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Natural biomaterials, particularly fibrous proteins, are extensively utilized in skin tissue engineering. However, their application is impeded by batch-to-batch variance, limited chemical or physical versatility, and environmental concerns. Recent advancements in gene editing and fermentation technology have catalyzed the emergence of recombinant fibrous protein biomaterials, which are gaining traction in skin tissue engineering. The modular and highly customizable nature of recombinant synthesis enables precise control over biomaterial design, facilitating the incorporation of multiple functional motifs. Additionally, recombinant synthesis allows for a transition from animal-derived sources to microbial sources, thereby reducing endotoxin content and rendering recombinant fibrous protein biomaterials more amenable to scalable production and clinical use. In this review, we provide an overview of prevalent recombinant fibrous protein biomaterials (collagens, elastin, silk proteins and their chimeric derivatives) used in skin tissue engineering (STE) and compare them with their animal-derived counterparts. Furthermore, we discuss their applications in STE, along with the associated challenges and future prospects.
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.