注意差距:规范骨修复生物材料的临床前测试

Q3 Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Anders Palmquist, Furqan A. Shah
{"title":"注意差距:规范骨修复生物材料的临床前测试","authors":"Anders Palmquist,&nbsp;Furqan A. Shah","doi":"10.1016/j.bbiosy.2025.100121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The use of bone-repair biomaterials is rapidly expanding to meet the needs of an ageing and increasingly active population, often with compromised bone quality. However, inconsistencies in how materials are assessed preclinically, across animal models, sampling strategies, and analytical techniques, have led to flawed comparisons and misleading claims. Fundamental differences in material properties and the biological responses they elicit are frequently ignored, conflating distinct mechanisms of bone formation. This \"<em>apples vs. oranges</em>\" problem is magnified by the growing diversity of biomaterials. Here, we call for a more systematic, context-aware approach to biomaterial evaluation that emphasises standardisation and biological relevance.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":72379,"journal":{"name":"Biomaterials and biosystems","volume":"20 ","pages":"Article 100121"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mind the gap: Standardising preclinical testing of bone-repair biomaterials\",\"authors\":\"Anders Palmquist,&nbsp;Furqan A. Shah\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.bbiosy.2025.100121\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>The use of bone-repair biomaterials is rapidly expanding to meet the needs of an ageing and increasingly active population, often with compromised bone quality. However, inconsistencies in how materials are assessed preclinically, across animal models, sampling strategies, and analytical techniques, have led to flawed comparisons and misleading claims. Fundamental differences in material properties and the biological responses they elicit are frequently ignored, conflating distinct mechanisms of bone formation. This \\\"<em>apples vs. oranges</em>\\\" problem is magnified by the growing diversity of biomaterials. Here, we call for a more systematic, context-aware approach to biomaterial evaluation that emphasises standardisation and biological relevance.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72379,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biomaterials and biosystems\",\"volume\":\"20 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100121\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biomaterials and biosystems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666534425000169\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomaterials and biosystems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666534425000169","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

骨修复生物材料的使用正在迅速扩大,以满足老龄化和日益活跃的人口的需求,通常骨骼质量受损。然而,临床前评估材料的方式、动物模型、采样策略和分析技术的不一致性导致了有缺陷的比较和误导性的说法。材料特性的基本差异及其引发的生物反应经常被忽视,混淆了不同的骨形成机制。这个“苹果vs橘子”的问题被日益多样化的生物材料放大了。在这里,我们呼吁采用一种更系统的、环境感知的方法来评估生物材料,强调标准化和生物学相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Mind the gap: Standardising preclinical testing of bone-repair biomaterials
The use of bone-repair biomaterials is rapidly expanding to meet the needs of an ageing and increasingly active population, often with compromised bone quality. However, inconsistencies in how materials are assessed preclinically, across animal models, sampling strategies, and analytical techniques, have led to flawed comparisons and misleading claims. Fundamental differences in material properties and the biological responses they elicit are frequently ignored, conflating distinct mechanisms of bone formation. This "apples vs. oranges" problem is magnified by the growing diversity of biomaterials. Here, we call for a more systematic, context-aware approach to biomaterial evaluation that emphasises standardisation and biological relevance.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
25 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信