ReviewFrontiers in immunology2026
Immune ageing in skeletal fragility: clonal haematopoiesis and failure of inflammatory resolution during fracture repair.
Review in Frontiers in immunology, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Older adults with comparable bone mineral density or fracture-risk estimates may nevertheless differ markedly in fracture occurrence, repair kinetics and functional recovery. This heterogeneity suggests that skeletal fragility reflects, at least in part, ageing of the bone-immune-haematopoietic system rather than bone mass alone. Here, we synthesise evidence linking the aged osteoimmune niche to inflammatory bone loss and impaired fracture repair. We focus on four interrelated processes: CHIP-associated amplification of myeloid inflammation, shaped by driver mutation and clone size; age-related skewing of T- and B-cell compartments; persistent cellular senescence and senescence-associated secretory signalling; and failure of macrophage- and regulatory T-cell-mediated inflammatory resolution. Among CHIP drivers, direct skeletal evidence is strongest for DNMT3A-mutant clones in inflammatory bone loss. Bone-specific evidence for TET2 remains limited, whereas evidence for ASXL1 is largely absent. In fracture repair, the most direct preclinical evidence concerns cellular senescence and age-altered macrophage function, while the ability of CHIP to predict delayed union has not been validated. We define immune resilience as the capacity to mount a proportionate acute response, clear damaged cells and debris, actively resolve inflammation, and transition to reparative and remodelling states. Current evidence is insufficient to support routine immune-guided fracture care. The immediate priority is to determine, in prospective fracture cohorts, whether phase-resolved local and circulating measures explain variation in repair beyond bone mineral density, frailty, fracture characteristics, biological sex and treatment exposure.
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.