ReviewJournal of functional biomaterials2026
Plant-Derived Polynucleotides/Polydeoxyribonucleotides in Skin Biomaterials: Delivery Platforms and Bioactivity Attribution.
Review in Journal of functional biomaterials, 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
In the fields of dermatology and skin biomaterials, polynucleotides (PN) and polydeoxyribonucleotides (PDRN) typically refer to deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA)-based polymers or heterogeneous DNA-fragment mixtures rather than ribonucleic acid (RNA) polynucleotides. Recently, plant-derived PN/PDRN preparations, sourced from callus, adventitious roots, and plant cell culture systems, have emerged as a promising animal-free material class. However, current evidence remains predominantly preclinical and should not be construed as demonstrating clinical equivalence to conventional animal-derived PDRN. This review synthesizes recent reports on plant-derived and other non-animal PN/PDRN and integrates them with delivery platform evidence relevant to skin biomaterials. We distinguish directly demonstrated findings from plant-derived preparations from inferences drawn from animal-derived PDRN, synthetic sequence-defined nucleic acids, or broader biomaterial delivery literature. The review further emphasizes operational molecular definitions, polymer length and fragment distribution reporting, DNA purity and integrity, RNA carryover, residual nucleoproteins and plant-derived macromolecules, free nucleotide/nucleoside or degradation product fractions, enzymatic degradation, delivery matrices, and hypothesis-matched controls. Available data suggest overlapping biological signatures with classical PDRN, including keratinocyte repair, fibroblast extracellular matrix (ECM) remodeling, and A2A receptor-associated readouts; however, A2A receptor dependency has not been directly established for most plant-derived PN/PDRN preparations and should be interpreted as a working mechanistic hypothesis unless perturbation experiments demonstrate pathway dependence. Direct head-to-head studies using matched DNA dose, molecular weight distribution, purity, delivery platform, and exposure conditions remain limited. Accordingly, plant-derived PN/PDRN should be evaluated as a source-process-structure-platform-function system rather than as a DNA fraction alone.
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.