ReviewPlants (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Current Regulatory Frameworks for Bioactive Inputs in Plant Systems Producing Pharmaceutically Important Compounds.
Review in Plants (Basel, Switzerland), 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Plant cell, tissue, and organ cultures are increasingly used as controlled platforms for producing pharmaceutically important specialized metabolites. Their productivity can be improved through elicitors, plant biostimulant-like substances, microbial inputs, and nano-enabled delivery systems. However, the regulatory interpretation of these inputs is not determined only by their biological mechanism. It also depends on product composition, formulation, intended use, exposure scenario, and label claim. This review analyzes how elicitors, plant biostimulants, biofertilizer- and bioinput-related concepts, and nano-enabled inputs are positioned within selected regulatory frameworks in the European Union, United States, Canada, Brazil, India, China, and Mexico. The analysis shows that current frameworks increasingly emphasize product identity, efficacy substantiation, safety evidence, and labeling, but they remain fragmented for multifunctional materials that may simultaneously affect nutrient-related processes, abiotic stress tolerance, defense signaling, growth regulation, and specialized metabolism. Nano-enabled and encapsulated formulations create additional challenges because they can modify uptake, persistence, bioavailability, release behavior, residue profiles, and non-target exposure compared with conventional formulations. A clearer distinction is therefore needed between contained biotechnological use in plant biofactories and open-environment agricultural applications. Future regulatory development should move toward formulation-level assessment, claim-specific evidence, nanospecific characterization, traceability, and harmonized terminology to support innovation while ensuring safety, reproducibility, and regulatory clarity.
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.