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

Programmable DNA-based biomaterials for bone tissue engineering

Xu X., Kou E., Zhang H., Zhang K., Zhang H.

Narrative Review, published in Fundam Res (2025) — 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
Fundam Res (2025)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
40777770
PMCID
PMC12327870
DOI
10.1016/j.fmre.2024.12.015
Citations
1

Abstract (original English)

Bone defects are a common pathology in bone tissue diseases, and existing therapeutic interventions have significant limitations, highlighting the need for innovative strategies and advanced biomaterials. DNA, traditionally recognized as a prominent genetic material, also possesses exceptional properties as a biological material, making it an ideal nanoscale building block for creating various DNA-based biomaterials, such as DNA framework materials and DNA hydrogels. DNA-based biomaterials offer notable advantages, including structural versatility, biocompatibility, and, crucially, programmability, which position them as promising candidates for bone tissue engineering. This review explores recent advancements in the use of DNA-based biomaterials for bionic mineralization and drug delivery systems, as well as their future potential in this field.

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

Browse all related research

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