ReviewCell regeneration (London, England)2026
Systemic regeneration medicines for muscular dystrophy: progress and challenges in pro-regenerative drug development.
Review in Cell regeneration (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Regenerative medicine has the potential to restore lost organ and tissue functions, and research on cell transplantation is steadily advancing toward clinical application. However, significant challenges remain in developing cell therapies for skeletal muscle, largely because the human body contains more than 600 individual muscles, making it impractical to treat all affected muscles through local transplantation alone. One strategy to overcome this limitation is to enhance the intrinsic regenerative capacity of muscle through various modalities; in this review, we define these approaches as pro-regenerative drugs. Histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors provide a compelling example, demonstrating that stimulation of endogenous muscle regeneration can confer therapeutic benefits in the genetic disease Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). This raises a fundamental question: why do pro-regenerative drugs provide durable benefits without Dystrophin restoration? This review summarizes the current status and importance of pro-regenerative drug development and discusses why sustained therapeutic effects can be achieved despite the lack of gene complementation. It also highlights key pathways that promote muscle regeneration as potential targets for future therapies.
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.