Peptide Library

Human study PLS-00204

Multiplexed molecular descriptors of pressure ulcers defined by imaging mass spectrometry.

Uncontrolled pilot study · Not reported participants enrolled · not included in the assessments (other)

Version 1 · published November 8, 2026 · evidence through November 8, 2026 · research snapshot 2026.1.1 · methodology ev-1 · Automated assessment by AI (claude-opus-5-5 and claude-sonnet-5-5), not reviewed by a person.

Only the abstract was available. Essential methods may be missing, which limits what can be judged.

Reports of this study

Every publication, registration and abstract describing this one study. Participants are counted once.

  • Multiplexed molecular descriptors of pressure ulcers defined by imaging mass spectrometry.primary · Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society · 2011-10-19 · PMID 22092844 · DOI

Design and participants

Design
Uncontrolled pilot study
Population
Patients with pressure ulcers whose wound tissue was analyzed; numbers and characteristics not stated
Conditions
Pressure ulcer
Planned enrollment (registry)
Not reported
Enrolled
Not reported
Randomized
Not reported
Completed follow-up
Not reported
Funding
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural (per publication type)

Intervention and comparator

What each group received. Related peptides, analogs and combinations are never treated as the compound itself.

    What the authors reported

    As stated in the sources. This is the authors’ account, not Peptide Library’s assessment.

    Adverse events

    None reported. That is not evidence of safety, and how safety was monitored isn’t described.

    The authors concluded (paraphrased): Imaging mass spectrometry can map molecular disturbances in chronic wound tissue. Alpha-defensins may mark wound status, and endogenous thymosin β4 appears to be a favorable marker, with higher levels in adjacent dermis and maturing wound areas.

    Peptide Library’s assessment

    An automated assessment, made by AI separately from the authors’ conclusions and not reviewed by a person. How risk of bias is assessed.

    Limitations

    • other: Thymosin β4 was measured as an endogenous tissue protein, not administered, so the study gives no evidence about treatment effects.
    • abstract only: Only the abstract is available. Sample size, patient characteristics and methods details are not reported.
    • small or imprecise: The authors describe it as a pilot study, and the number of ulcer samples analyzed is not given.
    • no control group: The pilot compared regions within ulcers and adjacent tissue. It had no comparison group and no intervention.
    • inappropriate endpoint: Thymosin β4 was a tissue biomarker, not an administered treatment, so the study gives no clinical efficacy or safety outcomes.

    No risk-of-bias assessment has been published for this study’s results.

    Claims this study informs

    Where each value comes from

    • author_conclusion: PMID 22092844, abstract (sentences 5 and 7) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
    • design: PMID 22092844, abstract (sentence 2) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
    • funding: PMID 22092844, title (publication types) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
    • population: PMID 22092844, abstract (sentence 1) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only

    • Version 1 · published November 8, 2026 · evidence through November 8, 2026 · research snapshot 2026.1.1 · methodology ev-1 · Automated assessment by AI (claude-opus-5-5 and claude-sonnet-5-5), not reviewed by a person.

    These assessments describe published research. Records marked automated were produced by AI under the published methodology and have not been reviewed by a person; they can contain errors. None of this is medical advice, not a statement about any product’s safety for human use, and not a regulatory approval. Peptide Library’s vendor and partner relationships play no part in them (editorial independence).