ArticlePloS one2025
A comparative study on immune responses to demineralized and decellularized bone substitute following intraperitoneal implantation in mouse model.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Self-Assembled Nanoclay Gel with Spheroid MSC-Derived Exosome Mimetics to Integrate Demineralized Bone Matrix and Noggin-Targeting miRNA for Synergistic Osteogenesis.Advanced functional materials · 2026Article
- Syndrome differentiation and treatment of pediatric central precocious puberty: role of the spleen-kidney axis.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The immunological sensitization of implanted bone grafts is crucial for long-term success. This study aimed to investigate the immune responses following implantation of lyophilized demineralized (DMB) and lyophilized decellularized (DCC) bovine cancellous bone substitutes, respectively, in mouse models of peritoneal implantation to evaluate the effectiveness of DMB and DCC processing methods. The DMB and DCC substitutes were prepared using published methods. BALB/c mice were divided into four groups (n = 4). A small abdominal incision was created to deliver the DMB or DCC materials into the peritoneal cavity. The first group received native unprocessed bone, while the second group was sham-operated (SO). The third and fourth groups received DMB and DCC substitutes, respectively. The immunogenicity effects of the implants were assessed through WBC count, spleen index, CD4 + /CD8 + counts, cytokine expression, and histology analysis of the spleen, liver and kidney. Native controls displayed systemic inflammation. The DMB group showed an increased trend in WBC count, cytokine profile and spleen index on day seven, followed by a considerable reduction in the DCC group compared to DMB on days 14 and 21. The native group showed significantly higher CD4+ /CD8+ T-cells and proinflammatory cytokines (IL-12, TNF-α, IFN-γ, MCP-1, IL-6). Additionally, the DMB group showed significantly higher mRNA levels for IL-1β, TNF-α, IL-6, and the anti-inflammatory cytokine IL-10. The DMB group further exhibited a significantly higher CD4 + count, while the DCC group demonstrated higher CD8+ T-cells on day 1. Histological assessments of the liver and kidney revealed pyknotic nuclei, necrotic cells, and extravasated RBCs in the native group and, to a lesser extent, in the DMB group, while the DCC group showed normal morphology similar to Sham. Both DMB and DCC demonstrated favourable immunocompatibility properties, while DCC exhibited further immune tolerance in the mouse model.
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.