Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

Biologics for bone regeneration: advances in cell, protein, gene, and mRNA therapies

Del Toro Runzer C., Balmayor ER., van Griensven M.

Narrative Review on Face & Skin, Systemic / IV, published in Bone Res (2026) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Narrative Review
Journal
Bone Res (2026)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
41521187
PMCID
PMC12791149
DOI
10.1038/s41413-025-00487-0
Citations
2

Abstract (original English)

Bone fractures represent a significant global healthcare burden. Although fractures typically heal on their own, some fail to regenerate properly, leading to nonunion, a condition that causes prolonged disability, morbidity, and mortality. The challenge of treating nonunion fractures is further complicated in patients with underlying bone disorders where systemic and local factors impair bone healing. Traditional treatment approaches, including autografts, allografts, xenografts, and synthetic biomaterials, face limitations such as donor site pain, immune rejection, and insufficient mechanical strength, underscoring the need for alternative strategies. Biologic therapies have emerged as promising tools to enhance bone regeneration by leveraging the body's natural healing processes. This review explores the critical role of conventional and emerging biologics in fracture healing. We categorize biologic therapies into protein-based treatments, gene and transcript therapies, small molecules, peptides, and cell-based therapies, highlighting their mechanisms of action, advantages, and clinical relevance. Finally, we examine the potential applications of biologics in treating fractures associated with bone disorders such as osteoporosis, osteogenesis imperfecta, rickets, osteomalacia, Paget's disease, and bone tumors. By integrating biologic therapies with existing biomaterial-based

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence
AnimalsHumansRNA, MessengerBiological ProductsBone RegenerationGenetic Therapy

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research