ArticleScientific reports2025
Exploring the role of two polypeptide nanofiber gels derived from RADA16-I self-assembly in accelerating burn wound healing.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Peptide-Based Nanogels for Pharmaceutical and Biotechnological Applications: From Fmoc-FF to Other Peptide Sequences.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Peptides in wound healing: A comprehensive review of their roles, challenges, and hydrogel-based delivery systems.EXCLI journal · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study systematically evaluates the therapeutic effects and molecular mechanisms of peptide nanofiber gels RG and RJ in deep second-degree burn wound healing. The gels are composed of the self-assembling peptide RADA16-I (R) conjugated with either a GLP-1 analog (G) or Jagged-1 protein (J), both of which exhibit good physicochemical properties, including well-defined three-dimensional nanofiber architectures, transparent gel consistency, and significantly enhanced mechanical strengths (storage modulus increased by ~ 4.3-fold for RG and ~ 7.09-fold for RJ) with high composite viscosities (5.36 Pa·s for RG; 7.08 Pa·s for RJ). In vitro experiments demonstrated that RG and RJ significantly promoted cell proliferation and migration. In vivo studies revealed that RG and RJ accelerated the healing of deep second-degree burn wounds through significant angiogenesis, reduction of systemic inflammation, and enhanced tissue regeneration. Notably, after 14 days, the wound closure rates in the RG and RJ groups reached 89.5% and 76.8%, respectively, compared to 70.1% in the R group and 67% in the control group. This difference can be attributed to their advantages in reducing systemic inflammation, promoting vascular formation during the healing process, and increasing collagen deposition. Our findings suggest that RG and RJ nanofiber gels hold great potential as innovative solutions for the care of deep second-degree burn wounds.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.