ReviewPharmacological reviews2026
Regenerative therapeutics for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
Review in Pharmacological reviews, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Global research status and development trends of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and gut microbiota: a comprehensive analysis based on bibliometrics and knowledge visualization.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Pooled it
- Mitochondrial dysfunction and the regulatory cell death crosstalk network in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: from oxidative stress mechanisms to targeted therapeutic strategies.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Research Progress and Comparative Evaluation of Three Cutting-Edge Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Treatment Strategies: Biologics, Bronchoscopic Lung Volume Reduction, and Stem Cell Therapies.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is one of the most common lung diseases worldwide, characterized by an accelerated loss of lung function. A key problem underlying COPD is increased tissue destruction in combination with defective lung tissue repair. As current therapies do not modify the progression of the disease, new therapies aimed at restoring lung tissue repair in COPD need to be developed. In an attempt to address this major unmet need, there has been a surge in both preclinical and clinical studies, aiming to identify key mechanisms underpinning defective lung repair and the ability to inhibit or even reverse this defect. This includes small molecules such as retinoids, as well as advanced therapy medicinal products such as cell therapies or therapies with cell-derived products such as extracellular vesicles, or secreted proteins. The results of these endeavors have been variable with failures as well as successful proof-of-concepts. In this review, we provide an overview of the current state of the field, including modes of action of the therapeutics that are or have been considered for lung regeneration, including a discussion on the reasons for failure where relevant. In addition, we discuss hurdles in the clinical development of regenerative therapeutics for COPD including clinical outcomes, route of administration and formulation as these are pivotal considerations moving forward. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is characterized by progressive alveolar destruction and defective epithelial regeneration. Targetable mechanisms, including cellular senescence, altered mesenchymal-epithelial signaling, and chronic inflammation, impair progenitor function and niche integrity. Therapeutic strategies that restore epithelial repair, including small molecules, biologics, and cell-based approaches, represent a promising path toward disease modification and long-term lung function restoration.
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.