ArticleDrug delivery and translational research2026
Image-guided in vivo evaluation and comparison of bone-targeting peptides for therapeutic intervention.
Article in Drug delivery and translational research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
Abstract
Hydroxyapatite (HA)-binding peptides hold strong potential for bone-targeted therapies due to their high affinity for mineralized tissues. However, most existing studies have primarily focused on in vitro binding characterization, offering limited insight into their in vivo biodistribution and bone-binding performance. In this study, we evaluated the in vivo behavior of four HA-binding peptides, including D8, E8, YD8, and YE8, using fluorescence imaging to assess biodistribution in both healthy and pathological bone environments. In healthy animals, D8 showed the strongest bone-binding capacity, with prominent localization in the skull, femur, and tibia, while YD8 exhibited moderate binding. E8 and YE8 showed more limited localization, influenced by peptide dosage and binding kinetics. In pathological models, including tibial defects and osteogenesis imperfecta (OIM) mice, D8 and YD8 preferentially accumulated in compromised bone regions, highlighting their potential utility in targeting diseased bone microenvironments. Fluorescence imaging combined with spectral unmixing algorithms enabled effective visualization and quantification of peptide localization and distribution. These findings emphasize the value of in vivo studies for advancing the therapeutic and diagnostic applications of HA-binding peptides. The results provide a foundation for optimizing peptide design to improve specificity and efficacy in bone repair and regeneration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40954411What 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.