Elsevier

Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews

Volume 64, Issue 12, September 2012, Pages 1277-1291
Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews

Studies of bone morphogenetic protein-based surgical repair

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2012.03.014Get rights and content

Abstract

Over the past several decades, recombinant human bone morphogenetic proteins (rhBMPs) have been the most extensively studied and widely used osteoinductive agents for clinical bone repair. Since rhBMP-2 and rhBMP-7 were cleared by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for certain clinical uses, millions of patients worldwide have been treated with rhBMPs for various musculoskeletal disorders. Current clinical applications include treatment of long bone fracture non-unions, spinal surgeries, and oral maxillofacial surgeries. Considering the growing number of recent publications related to clincal research of rhBMPs, there exists enormous promise for these proteins to be used in bone regenerative medicine. The authors take this opportunity to review the rhBMP literature paying specific attention to the current applications of rhBMPs in bone repair and spine surgery. The prospective future of rhBMPs delivered in combination with tissue engineered scaffolds is also reviewed.

Introduction

The repair and replacement of bone is a major clinical problem. The need for functional treatments of fracture non-unions, spinal injuries, and bone loss associated with trauma and cancer has become increasingly common and remains a significant challenge in the field of orthopaedic surgery. In the United States alone, it is estimated that over 10 million fracture-related physician or emergency visits occur every year [1]. These numbers will only continue to grow as human life expentancies increase due to better medical care.

Bone fractures can be treated with a cast because the broken bone needs to be set to improve the healing. Sometimes, surgery is required for bone fractures associated with small bone voids that can be filled with an appropriate bone void filler. For large bone defects, biological grafts such as autologous bone grafts, allografts, and demineralized bone matrix can be used, but each possess their own advantages and disadvantages. Autografts have been recognized as the gold standard in bone grafts because of their high success rate (as high as ~ 80–90%) and unlikelihood of being rejected [2]. However, these grafts are often associated with several shortcomings including donor-site morbidity, limited tissue for harvesting, and increased surgical time [3], [4], [5], [6]. Allografts and demineralized bone matrix have been introduced into clinical practice to overcome the drawbacks of autografts. Allografts are tissues harvested from one individual and implanted into another. Demineralized bone matrix is allograft bone tissue in which the inorganic mineral has been removed by exposure to acid, leaving behind organic collagenous matrix and non-collagenous proteins including growth factors [7], [8], [9]. The advantages of allografts and demineralized bone matrix are that they are readily available in nearly unlimited supply and can be easily processed into a variety of forms for specific applications [9], [10]. However, disease transmission, host immune reaction, and implant rejection remain significant disadvantages of these grafts [11]. As a result of these limitations, there has been significant recent interest in the development of biomaterials that can augment bone healing to preclude the needs for autografts and allografts [12]. For instance, researchers have actively investigated biodegradable polymeric scaffolds combined with growth factors and/or osteoprogenitor cells as a viable alternative to traditional grafts [13], [14], [15], [16], [17].

Tissue engineering can be described as the combination of biological, chemical, and engineering principles toward the repair, restoration, and replacement of tissues using cells, scaffolds, and biologic factors alone or in combination [18]. An important element of successful bone tissue engineering constructs is osteoinduction, or the stimulation of osteoprogenitor cells to differentiate into osteoblasts, which is often accomplished through the use of growth factors [19]. Bone growth factors are usually proteins secreted by cells which provide the necessary driving force for osteoblast functions including proliferation and differentiation. Generally, the mechanism of action of bone growth factors is to interact with membrane receptors on target cells. This interaction triggers an intracellular signaling cascade that ultimately induces the expression of bone associated genes in the nucleus and protein production in the cytoplasm [20], [21]. Over the past several decades, scientists have actively investigated growth factors for use in bone repair and regeneration preclinically. For instance, bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs), insulin-like growth factors (IGFs), granulocyte–macrophage colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF), basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF), and platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) have all demonstrated the ability to induce significant bone formation and hold potential for use in bone reparative therapies [21], [22]. A review of the literature has shown that BMPs are the most effective growth factors in improving healing of non-unions, fractures, spinal fusions, and dental implants [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33]. Although PDGF is currently used in clinical practice, the only osteoinductive materials commercially available today are BMPs. BMPs were discovered by Dr. Marshall Urist when he observed de novo bone formation in rats after the implanation of decalcified bone into soft tissue pouches for which he later named the proteins responsible for the bone formation-BMPs [34]. To date, more than 20 BMPs have been identified, of which 7 appear capable of initiating bone growth [35], [36]. Thanks to notable advances in molecular biology and genomics, human BMP genes have been identified and cloned. rhBMPs can now be produced and purified from E. coli and mammailian cell lines for biochemical analysis and clincial trails [37], [38], [39], [40], [41]. Different animal models have been used to demonstrate the therapeutic potential of rhBMPs in bone repair and regeneration [22], [42], [43]. Presently, rhBMPs remain the most important growth factors in bone formation and repair [44], [45]. Two rhBMP-based commercial products: INFUSE® (rhBMP-2, Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) and OP-1™ (rhBMP-7, Stryker Biotech, Hopkinton, MA) have received Food and Drug Administration (FDA) clearance for several surgical applications (see Table 1). Since the half-life of rhBMP-2 is about 6.7 min in non-human primates due to enzymatic degradation and rapid clearance rate [46], [47], [48], to increase its effectiveness of healing non-union fractures, rhBMPs are often combined with biocompatible carriers such as aborbable collagen sponges. Loading rhBMP into an absorbable collagen sponge allows for gradual rhBMP release over time, which stimulates new bone formation in the implant site. Current clinical applications of rhBMP-based products include long bone non-unions, spinal fusion, and oral surgeries [49], [50], [51]. In certain open tibial fractures and non-unions, rhBMPs can play an active role in healing broken bones [52]. In spinal surgery, rhBMP induces new bone formation in the disc space to fuse the vertebrae to reduce back pain, restore function, and strengthen the spine [53]. In oral surgery, rhBMP plays a role in the induction of new bone formation in the edentulous area of a missing tooth in order to support a dental implant [54], [55]. Considering the growing number of publications related to the clinical applications of rhBMPs, the purpose of this review is to cover the latest clinical development of rhBMPs including the use of BMP delivery carriers and approved BMP products for surgical repairs.

Section snippets

Long bone fractures

Long bone fractures make up a large portion of clinically reported fractures [1]. While many long bone fractures can be repaired without surgery, a significant portion of fractures are considered critical-size defects meaning they commonly form non-unions without surgical intervention. It should be noted the term critical-size is controversial since a recent study found that the accepted critical-size for human long bones (fracture gap greater than 1 cm and affecting at least 50% of the cortical

Design metrics for BMP delivery devices

While current clinical treatments have been shown to be effective in treating bone and spinal defects or injuries, the research community is actively seeking alternative drug delivery vehicles in order to improve current therapies. The overall aim is to develop an osteoinductive, osteogenic, and osteoconductive scaffold that accelerates bone formation at a similar rate to autologous treatment. To reach this aim, significant research has focused on the local, controlled delivery of rhBMPs

Critical outlook

Applications of BMPs in long bone repairs, spinal fusions, and oral surgeries are becoming increasingly common. While current results and outcomes have shown promise, significant issues with BMP-based therapies remain. One major concern has been the off-label use of BMPs. Over the past decade, at least 85% of the principal procedures using BMPs were off-label applications [235]. rhBMP-2 may lead to early bone resorption around PEEK implants, which can cause loosening and pain [108]. Also, the

Acknowledgements

Dr. Laurencin was the recipient of a Presidential Faculty Fellowship Award from National Science Foundation. Dr. Kevin Lo wishes to thank the Jo-Anne Smith, MD research and education foundation for their funded support of his research. The authors gratefully acknowledge funding from the NSF-EFRI 0736002, and NIH-R21 AR060480.

References (267)

  • S.F. El-Amin et al.

    The indications and use of bone morphogenetic proteins in foot, ankle, and tibia surgery

    Foot Ankle Clin.

    (2010)
  • T.K. Sampath

    Recombinant human osteogenic protein-1 (hOP-1) induces new bone formation in vivo with a specific activity comparable with natural bovine osteogenic protein and stimulates osteoblast proliferation and differentiation in vitro

    J. Biol. Chem.

    (1992)
  • F. Hillger et al.

    Biophysical comparison of BMP-2, ProBMP-2, and the free pro-peptide reveals stabilization of the pro-peptide by the mature growth factor

    J. Biol. Chem.

    (2005)
  • C.T. Laurencin et al.

    Poly(lactide-co-glycolide)/hydroxyapatite delivery of BMP-2-producing cells: a regional gene therapy approach to bone regeneration

    Biomaterials

    (2001)
  • H. Seeherman et al.

    Delivery of bone morphogenetic proteins for orthopedic tissue regeneration

    Cytokine Growth Factor Rev.

    (2005)
  • J. Lan et al.

    The influence of recombinant human BMP-2 on bone-implant osseointegration: biomechanical testing and histomorphometric analysis

    Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg.

    (2007)
  • V. Alt et al.

    A health economic analysis of the use of rhBMP-2 in Gustilo–Anderson grade III open tibial fractures for the UK, Germany, and France

    Injury

    (2009)
  • G.M. Calori et al.

    Application of rhBMP-7 and platelet-rich plasma in the treatment of long bone non-unions: a prospective randomised clinical study on 120 patients

    Injury

    (2008)
  • S.D. Glassman et al.

    Posterolateral lumbar spine fusion with INFUSE bone graft

    Spine J.

    (2007)
  • U.S. Market for Fracture Fixation Products, 2011 Analysis

    (14 September 2011)
  • B.N. Summers et al.

    Donor site pain from the ilium. A complication of lumbar spine fusion

    J. Bone Joint Surg. Br.

    (1989)
  • A.R. Gazdag et al.

    Alternatives to autogenous bone graft: efficacy and indications

    J. Am. Acad. Orthop. Surg.

    (1995)
  • R. Pollock et al.

    Donor site morbidity following iliac crest bone harvesting for cervical fusion: a comparison between minimally invasive and open techniques

    Eur. Spine J.

    (2008)
  • J.E. Feighan et al.

    Induction of bone by a demineralized bone matrix gel: a study in a rat femoral defect model

    J. Orthop. Res.

    (1995)
  • G.E. Friedlaender

    Immune responses to osteochondral allografts. Current knowledge and future directions

    Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res.

    (1983)
  • T.W. Bawer et al.

    Bone graft materials. An overview of the basic science

    Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res.

    (2000)
  • C.T. Laurencin et al.

    Tissue engineered bone-regeneration using degradable polymers: the formation of mineralized matrices

    Bone

    (1996)
  • C.T. Laurencin et al.

    Tissue engineering: orthopedic applications

    Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng.

    (1999)
  • C.T. Laurencin et al.

    The ABJS Nicolas Andry Award: tissue engineering of bone and ligament: a 15-year perspective

    Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res.

    (2006)
  • Y. Khan et al.

    Tissue engineering of bone: material and matrix considerations

    J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.

    (2008)
  • C. Laurencin et al.

    Bone graft substitutes

    Expert Rev. Med. Devices

    (2006)
  • S.D. Boden

    Bioactive factors for bone tissue engineering

    Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res.

    (1999)
  • C.H. Heldin et al.

    TGF-beta signalling from cell membrane to nucleus through SMAD proteins

    Nature

    (1997)
  • J.R. Lieberman et al.

    The role of growth factors in the repair of bone. Biology and clinical applications

    J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.

    (2002)
  • P.C. Bessa et al.

    Bone morphogenetic proteins in tissue engineering: the road from the laboratory to the clinic, part I (basic concepts)

    J. Tissue Eng. Regen. Med.

    (2008)
  • M. Kanayama et al.

    A prospective randomized study of posterolateral lumbar fusion using osteogenic protein-1 (OP-1) versus local autograft with ceramic bone substitute: emphasis of surgical exploration and histologic assessment

    Spine (Phila Pa 1976)

    (2006)
  • K.R. Garrison et al.

    Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of bone morphogenetic proteins in the non-healing of fractures and spinal fusion: a systematic review

    Health Technol. Assess.

    (2007)
  • M.F. Termaat et al.

    Bone morphogenetic proteins. Development and clinical efficacy in the treatment of fractures and bone defects

    J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.

    (2005)
  • D.B. Dean et al.

    Role of bone morphogenetic proteins and their antagonists in healing of bone fracture

    Front. Biosci.

    (2009)
  • J.B. Park

    Use of bone morphogenetic proteins in sinus augmentation procedure

    J. Craniofac. Surg.

    (2009)
  • A. Moghaddam et al.

    Clinical application of BMP 7 in long bone non-unions

    Arch. Orthop. Trauma Surg.

    (2010)
  • S. O'hEireamhoin et al.

    The use of bone morphogenetic protein 7 in fracture non-unions

    Orthop. Surg.

    (2011)
  • M.R. Urist

    Bone: formation by autoinduction

    Science

    (1965)
  • E. Abe

    Function of BMPs and BMP antagonists in adult bone

    Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci.

    (2006)
  • J.M. Wozney et al.

    Novel regulators of bone formation: molecular clones and activities

    Science

    (1988)
  • E.A. Wang

    Recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein induces bone formation

    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.

    (1990)
  • D.I. Israel et al.

    Expression and characterization of bone morphogenetic protein-2 in Chinese hamster ovary cells

    Growth Factors

    (1992)
  • M.P. Bostrom et al.

    Potential role of bone morphogenetic proteins in fracture healing

    Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res.

    (1998)
  • A.H. Reddi

    Role of morphogenetic proteins in skeletal tissue engineering and regeneration

    Nat. Biotechnol.

    (1998)
  • K.W. Lo et al.

    Current patents on osteoinductive molecules for bone tissue engineering

    Recent Pat. Biomed. Eng.

    (2011)
  • Cited by (216)

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    This review is part of the Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews theme issue on “Targeted delivery of therapeutics to bone and connective tissues”.

    1

    Contributed equally.

    View full text