Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41078569›Full record

ReviewOsteoarthritis and cartilage open2025

Organ-on-chip technologies: Novel tools with the potential to revolutionize osteoarthritis research and clinical development.

Carlo Alberto Paggi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Osteoarthritis and cartilage open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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

1 author.

Carlo Alberto PaggiDepartment of Developmental BioEngineering, TechMed Centre, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To critically evaluate the evolution of in vitro models for osteoarthritis (OA) research, with a specific focus on organ-on-chip (OOC) technologies, and to discuss their potential to overcome the limitations of traditional 2D, 3D, and explant models in disease modelling, drug discovery, and preclinical toxicology. Methods: This review synthesizes findings from recent literature regarding historical and current in vitro platforms used in OA research. It categorizes models based on biological complexity and physiological relevance, with particular emphasis on biomechanical and biochemical stimulation in OOC systems. Key examples from the literature are discussed to illustrate the utility and scalability of emerging platforms. Results: Traditional 2D cultures, while widely used, lack the spatial and environmental complexity necessary to replicate native joint physiology. 3D cultures and explant models provide improved architecture and cellular context, but face challenges related to standardization, longevity, and reproducibility. OOC systems offer a dynamic and tunable microenvironment that supports real-time monitoring and integration of mechanical cues such as shear stress and compression. These platforms have been successfully employed to investigate immune cell migration, drug permeability across barriers, and cytokine-induced matrix degradation. Furthermore, their application in preclinical modelling for efficacy and safety studies highlights the potential for more predictive, human-relevant data compared to conventional methods. Conclusion: OOCs technology represents a transformative advance in OA modelling, offering increased physiological relevance and experimental precision. With continued refinement and validation, OOC platforms could significantly improve the translational success of disease-modifying OA therapies.

Indexed as

CartilageJointOrgan-on-chipOsteoarthritisRegulatory

Identifiers

PMID41078569
PMCPMC12510194

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.