0
Commentary   |    
BMPs: Why Are They Not in Everyday Use?
Joseph M. Lane, MD
View Disclosures and Other Information
The Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 East 70th Street, New York, NY 10021

The author did not receive grants or outside funding in support of his research or preparation of this manuscript. The author received payments or other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity (Genetics Institute, Inc.). No commercial entity paid or directed, or agreed to pay or direct, any benefits to any research fund, foundation, educational institution, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the author is affiliated or associated.

The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery.  2001; 83:S161-a-S162 
5 Recommendations (Recommend) | 3 Comments | Saved by 3 Users Save Case
Since the pioneering work of Marshall Urist, who was able to identify a family of proteins that have the property of osteoinduction, investigators in many laboratories have shown that bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs) will elicit the differentiation of non-committed stem cells along the line leading to the formation of bone. Not only are the BMPs able to stimulate progenitor cells to differentiate and form bone, but in appropriate environments, they can produce cartilage, tendon, or ligament. Recent data suggest that certain BMPs may even lead to the partial repair of nerve and kidney. Recombinant forms of BMPs, particularly BMP2, 4, and 7, have the capability of healing critical-sized bone defects in rodents, dogs, sheep, and primates when combined with a carrier of collagen, guanidine-extracted demineralized bone matrix, hydroxyapatite, or biodegradable polymers. Clinical trials using a highly concentrated human extract of BMP have shown promise for the treatment of established non-unions and spine fusion. Johnson et al. reported in a series of publications that a combination of internal fixation and implants containing human BMP could lead to successful union in more than 90% of patients with established non-unions1. In five patients with established posterior spinal pseudarthrosis who underwent posterior spinal fusion with autogenous bone graft augmented with BMP, four went on to fusion.
Comprehensive clinical trials of recombinant BMIP2 and BMIP7 are currently underway in Europe and the United States in the areas of anterior spine fusion, in cages, and in long-bone non-unions and fractures. Each of these studies has demonstrated that recombinant BMP was comparable with autogenous bone graft.
With such studies in hand, extending from the lower-level mammals to humans, why hasn’t the FDA released these growth factors? Several issues are involved: the under-performance of BMP as one moves up the mammal chain, the problem of an appropriate carrier, and the clarification of the pathway to follow through the process of FDA approval.
Recombinant BMP can lead to a faster rate of union than can autogenous bone graft in femoral defects of rats, rabbits, and rodents2. However, when the BMPs were applied to primates, the recombinant BMPs achieved no better success than did autogenous bone graft3. In higher mammals, the BMPs may have to be present for a longer period of time and may have diffused away from the currently used carriers. Secondly, the number of progenitor cells that are responsive to BMPs may be more limited in the higher mammals and humans, particularly under clinical circumstances such as non-unions, than in young rodents. Thirdly, a family of various forms of BMP is found within bone that is closely linked to facilitating proteins such as osteocalcin. When recombinant BMPs are utilized in higher mammals, a single BMP is chosen and is used in a pharmacological dose rather than in a physiologic dose. It is still dependent on the recruitment of local cells, additional BMPs, and other growth factors.
Another problem has been the uncertainty of the ideal type of carrier. A variety of carriers have been used, including ceramics, collagen, non-collagenous proteins, biodegradable polymers, and allograft. Issues of binding, bioavailability, and diffusability and the kind of carriers have not been resolved. The BMPs that are now being utilized in human trials are easily diffusable from the collagens, which hold the BMP for only a short period of time. When carriers are developed that retain the BMP for a longer period of time, then results superior to those with autogenous bone graft may be obtained. Concerns have been raised about the use of single BMP versus a family of BMPs and the absence of the associated facilitating proteins, the uncertainty of the pharmacokinetics of the release of the material, and its duration. Finally, uncertainty remains as to the nature and number of responding cells at the site of application.
An unforeseen issue that has come to light in recent years regarding BMP is its role in osteoclast formation. When BMP is provided at an injury site, there is a stimulation of osteoblast lineage and also the release of factors that lead to the rapid production of osteoclasts. The formation of osteoclasts occurs before osteoblast formation. Large doses of BMP may lead to a wave of resorption that precedes the appearance of the osteoblasts. Pharmacological agents such as the bisphosphonates prevent osteoclast formation and activation, but clinical trials have yet to be performed to demonstrate a control of the resorptive phase.
Human fibular osteotomy trials using BMP-7 were performed by Geesink et al.10, who used demineralized bone matrix as a negative control. It became clear that the demineralized bone matrix, although it carried less BMP, provided results comparable with the results of the recombinant BMP. This raised the question of whether demineralized bone matrix, with its mixture of facilitating proteins including osteocalcin and osteopontin, may be able to utilize lower doses or BMP effectively and compete with the recombinant BMPs. In particular, there is continued research in the area of modifying allografts into demineralized bone matrix that concentrates the available BMP but also retains the critical facilitating proteins.
Human clinical trials remain the last barrier. When the BMPs first came to the attention of the FDA, the agency had no clear criteria for approval or validation of the efficacy of these growth factors. Were they a device or should they be tested for biological activity, and what was the best measure of outcome? Biotechnology companies providing recombinant BMPs had to work closely with the FDA to establish clinical trials that demonstrated no toxicity and to develop valid outcome parameters. Clinical trials that have just been completed were performed in anterior spine arthrodesis, tibial fractures, and the treatment of non-unions. Valid outcome parameters had to be established first, and efficacy then had to be evaluated in clinical trials. This required a considerable amount of time.
Thus, the road from Marshall Urist’s discovery of the BMPs, to the development of recombinant BMPs, to the proof of their efficacy in vitro and in vivo in animal models, and finally to clinical trials has taken a decade. The BMPs are now in the final approval stages by the FDA, but the definition of optimal conditions for their use is not complete. Attention should be directed at developing appropriate carriers and the mixture, timing, and diffusion characteristics of the BMPs. Different conditions and combinations may be necessary for different diseases or anatomical sites. At this time, clinical trials indicate that the recombinant BMPs are as effective as autogenous bone grafting. Future research directed at refining the BMP dosage, time course, release dynamics, and matrix carrier may establish the superiority of the BMPs over bone graft in humans.
JohnsonEE, Urist MR,Finerman GA. Resistant nonunions and partial or complete segmental defects of long bones. Treatment with implants of a composite of human bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) and autolyzed, antigen-extracted, allogeneic (AAA) bone. Clin Orthop,1992;277: 229-37. 277229  1992  [PubMed]
 
LaneJM, Tomin E,Bostrom MP. Biosynthetic bone grafting. Clin Orthop,1999;367 Suppl: 107-17. 367 Suppl107  1999 
 
BostromMP,Camacho NP. Potential role of bone morphogenetic proteins in fracture healing. Clin Orthop,1998;355 Suppl: 274-82. 355 Suppl274  1998 
 
CookSD, Baffes GC, Wolfe MW, Sampath TK, Rueger DC,Whitecloud TS 3rd. The effect of recombinant human osteogenic protein-1 on healing of large segmental bone defects. J Bone Joint Surg [Am],1994;76: 827-38. 76827  1994  [PubMed]
 
CookSD, Baffes GC, Wolfe MW, Sampath TK,Reuger DC. Recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-7 induces healing in a canine long-bone segmental defect model. Clin Orthop,1994;301: 302-12. 301302  1994  [PubMed]
 
CookSD, Wolfe MW, Salkeld SL,Rueger DC. Effect of recombinant human osteogenic protein-1 on healing of segmental defects in non-human primates. J Bone Joint Surg [Am],1995;77: 734-50. 77734  1995  [PubMed]
 
Kirker-Head CA, Gerhart TN, Schelling SH, Hennig GE, Wang E,Holtrop ME. Long-term healing of bone using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2. Clin Orthop,1995;318: 222-30. 318222  1995  [PubMed]
 
ToriumiDM, Kotler HS, Luxenberg DP, Holtrop ME,Wang EA. Mandibular reconstruction with a recombinant bone-inducing factor: functional, histologic, and biomechanical evaluation. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg,1991;117: 1101-12. 1171101  1991  [PubMed]
 
YaskoAW, Lane JM, Fellinger EJ, Rosen V, Wozney JM,Wang EA. The healing of segmental bone defects, induced by recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein (rhBMP-2): a radiographic, histological, and biomechanical study in rats. J Bone Joint Surg [Am],1992;74: 659-70. 74659  1992  [PubMed]
 
GeesinkRG, Hoefnagels NH,Bulstra SK. Osteogenic activity of OP-1 bone morphogenetic protein (BMP-7) in a human fibular defect. J Bone Joint Surg [Br],1999;81: 710-18. 81710  1999  [PubMed]
 

Submit a comment

JohnsonEE, Urist MR,Finerman GA. Resistant nonunions and partial or complete segmental defects of long bones. Treatment with implants of a composite of human bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) and autolyzed, antigen-extracted, allogeneic (AAA) bone. Clin Orthop,1992;277: 229-37. 277229  1992  [PubMed]
 
LaneJM, Tomin E,Bostrom MP. Biosynthetic bone grafting. Clin Orthop,1999;367 Suppl: 107-17. 367 Suppl107  1999 
 
BostromMP,Camacho NP. Potential role of bone morphogenetic proteins in fracture healing. Clin Orthop,1998;355 Suppl: 274-82. 355 Suppl274  1998 
 
CookSD, Baffes GC, Wolfe MW, Sampath TK, Rueger DC,Whitecloud TS 3rd. The effect of recombinant human osteogenic protein-1 on healing of large segmental bone defects. J Bone Joint Surg [Am],1994;76: 827-38. 76827  1994  [PubMed]
 
CookSD, Baffes GC, Wolfe MW, Sampath TK,Reuger DC. Recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-7 induces healing in a canine long-bone segmental defect model. Clin Orthop,1994;301: 302-12. 301302  1994  [PubMed]
 
CookSD, Wolfe MW, Salkeld SL,Rueger DC. Effect of recombinant human osteogenic protein-1 on healing of segmental defects in non-human primates. J Bone Joint Surg [Am],1995;77: 734-50. 77734  1995  [PubMed]
 
Kirker-Head CA, Gerhart TN, Schelling SH, Hennig GE, Wang E,Holtrop ME. Long-term healing of bone using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2. Clin Orthop,1995;318: 222-30. 318222  1995  [PubMed]
 
ToriumiDM, Kotler HS, Luxenberg DP, Holtrop ME,Wang EA. Mandibular reconstruction with a recombinant bone-inducing factor: functional, histologic, and biomechanical evaluation. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg,1991;117: 1101-12. 1171101  1991  [PubMed]
 
YaskoAW, Lane JM, Fellinger EJ, Rosen V, Wozney JM,Wang EA. The healing of segmental bone defects, induced by recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein (rhBMP-2): a radiographic, histological, and biomechanical study in rats. J Bone Joint Surg [Am],1992;74: 659-70. 74659  1992  [PubMed]
 
GeesinkRG, Hoefnagels NH,Bulstra SK. Osteogenic activity of OP-1 bone morphogenetic protein (BMP-7) in a human fibular defect. J Bone Joint Surg [Br],1999;81: 710-18. 81710  1999  [PubMed]
 
Accreditation Statement
These activities have been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint sponsorship of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
CME Activities Associated with This Article
Submit a Comment
Please read the other comments before you post yours. Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest.
Comments are moderated and will appear on the site at the discretion of JBJS editorial staff.

* = Required Field
(if multiple authors, separate names by comma)
Example: John Doe




Related Articles
Related Cases
Related Content
Topic Collections
Related Audio and Videos
Clinical Trials
Readers of This Also Read...
jbjs jobs
03/07/2012
CA - SOAR Medical Group
01/04/2012
PA - Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center - Dept. of Orthopaedics & Rehabilitation
05/18/2012
NH - Concord Orthopaedics
02/16/2012
MA - Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center