Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41225124›Full record

ReviewAdvances in experimental medicine and biology2026

Immunomodulation Strategies to Enhance Oral Bone Regeneration.

Miguel Cardoso, Farah Asa'ad, Teresa M V D Pinho E Melo, Maria Filomena Botelho, Marta Pineiro, Carlos Miguel Marto, Mafalda Laranjo

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Advances in experimental medicine and biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Miguel CardosoUniversity of Coimbra, Coimbra Institute for Clinical and Biomedical Research (iCBR), Area of Environment Genetics and Oncobiology (CIMAGO), Institute of Biophysics, Faculty of Medicine, Coimbra, Portugal.
Farah Asa'adDepartment of Oral Biochemistry, Institute of Odontology, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, SE, Göteborg, Sweden.
Teresa M V D Pinho E MeloUniversity of Coimbra, Coimbra Chemistry Centre-Institute of Molecular Sciences (CQC-IMS), Department of Chemistry, Coimbra, Portugal.
Maria Filomena BotelhoUniversity of Coimbra, Coimbra Institute for Clinical and Biomedical Research (iCBR), Area of Environment Genetics and Oncobiology (CIMAGO), Institute of Biophysics, Faculty of Medicine, Coimbra, Portugal.
Marta PineiroUniversity of Coimbra, Coimbra Chemistry Centre-Institute of Molecular Sciences (CQC-IMS), Department of Chemistry, Coimbra, Portugal.
Carlos Miguel MartoUniversity of Coimbra, Coimbra Institute for Clinical and Biomedical Research (iCBR), Area of Environment Genetics and Oncobiology (CIMAGO), Institute of Biophysics, Faculty of Medicine, Coimbra, Portugal. cmiguel.marto@uc.pt.
Mafalda LaranjoUniversity of Coimbra, Coimbra Institute for Clinical and Biomedical Research (iCBR), Area of Environment Genetics and Oncobiology (CIMAGO), Institute of Biophysics, Faculty of Medicine, Coimbra, Portugal.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several volumetric and qualitative bone limitations may contraindicate the use of bone-supported oral rehabilitation, which remains the gold standard for edentulous ridges. However, oral bone regeneration is a multifaceted process influenced by immune responses, cellular dynamics, and systemic factors. Moreover, its predictability in clinical settings remains limited, leading to challenges in consistently achieving the desired regenerative outcomes. This chapter explores immunomodulation strategies as innovative approaches to enhance alveolar bone regeneration, addressing the challenges of bone healing and repair. Traditional methods such as grafting and biomaterials, while effective, face limitations, including donor site morbidity and immune rejection. Thus, immunotherapy approaches emphasizing cell-based therapies (macrophage polarization, cytokines, and mesenchymal stem cells), material-based strategies (bioactive scaffolds and nanoparticles), and other supporting approaches like anti-inflammatory drugs and lifestyle interventions will be outlined. Even though preclinical studies suggest that some of these techniques can be crucial in the maintenance or resolution of the inflammation and thereby directing bone healing, several uncertainties remain regarding their clinical validation. Additionally, insights on the role of emerging strategies, such as photodynamic therapy (PDT) and near-infrared light (NIR) therapy, will be explored, considering their impact on immunity, infection, and bone repair. All these strategies can be combined to synergistically and positively affect outcomes in bone regeneration.

Indexed as

Bone RegenerationImmunomodulationAnimalsHumansPhotochemotherapyAlveolar bone regenerationBioactive scaffoldsImmunomodulationPhotodynamic therapy (PDT)

Identifiers

PMID41225124

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.