Biomarker changes in gingival crevicular fluid during orthodontic treatment with clear aligners – a systematic review

Full article

https://doi.org/10.53453/ms.2026.4.14

Biomarker changes in gingival crevicular fluid during
orthodontic treatment with clear aligners - a systematic review
Aušrinė Kuzmauskaitė
1
, Alvyda Žarovienė
2
1
Independent researcher
2
Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Kaunas,
Lithuania
Abstract
Introduction. Clear aligner therapy has gained widespread popularity as an alternative to fixed orthodontic
appliances; however, its biological effects on periodontal tissues remain not fully elucidated.
Aim. To synthesize the available evidence on cytokine and bone metabolism biomarker changes in gingival
crevicular fluid associated with orthodontic treatment using clear aligners.
Material and methods. This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preffered Reporting Items
for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive search was conducted on
PubMed, Science Direct, ProQuest, Web of Science and Cohrane Library electronic databases from July 1st until
July 31 2025. In accordance with the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, studies assessing changes in
inflammatory cytokines and bone metabolism biomarkers during orthodontic treatment with clear aligners were
included in this review.
Results. A total of 403 records were identified through electronic database searches, and after duplicate removal
and screening, 9 studies were included in the review. All examined inflammatory cytokines (interleukin-1 beta
(IL-), interleukin-1 alpha (IL-), tumor necrosis factor- alpha (TNF-α), interleukin-6 (IL-6), interleukin-8 (IL-
8), interleukin-2 (IL-2), interleukin-17 (IL-17), and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-
CSF)) exhibited elevated levels during the early phase of clear aligner therapy, reflecting an active inflammatory
response. Bone metabolism biomarkers, RANKL (receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligand) and OPN
(osteopontin) generally increased, while OPG (osteoprotegerin) showed a decreasing trend.
Conslusions: Orthodontic treatment with clear aligners is associated with measurable alterations in inflammatory
cytokines and bone metabolism biomarkers during the early phase of treatment. These findings emphasize the
biological activity of aligner therapy and highlight the need for further studies to clarify the clinical significance
of these molecular changes.
Keywords: gingival crevicular fluid, clear aligners, orthodontic treatment, cytokines, inflammatory biomarkers,
bone metabolism biomarkers.
Journal of Medical Sciences. 28 Apr, 2026 - Volume 14 | Issue 2. Electronic - ISSN: 2345-0592
Medical Sciences 2026 Vol. 14 (2), p. 133-147, https://doi.org/10.53453/ms.2026.4.14
133
1. Introduction
Orthodontic tooth movement (OTM) is a
biomechanical process in which orthodontic forces
disrupt the homeostasis of the periodontal ligament,
creating localized hypoxic conditions that initiate an
aseptic inflammatory response. This cascade
involves the recruitment of immune and bone cells,
as well as the release of cytokines and other
mediators, which together orchestrate alveolar bone
resorption by osteoclasts and bone formation by
osteoblasts, ultimately allowing tooth movement
[1]. As these molecular changes are reflected in the
periodontal environment, gingival crevicular fluid
(GCF) serves as a valuable medium for detecting
cytokines and other biomarkers related to
orthodontic tooth movement [2].
Gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) is an exudate of
inflammatory origin that derives from the gingival
plexus and adjacent periodontal tissues. It contains
proteins, tissue breakdown products, growth factors,
electrolytes, cytokines, as well as other low-
molecular-weight compounds and enzymes of both
host and bacterial origin [3]. Among the numerous
components of GCF, cytokines and bone
metabolism biomarkers (BMBs) are considered
crucial mediators, as they regulate inflammatory
responses and bone remodeling processes
underlying OTM [4]. Cytokines are low-molecular-
weight proteins (<25 kDa) secreted predominantly
in an autocrine or paracrine manner, and many of
them participate in the recruitment and activation of
immune cells at sites of localized force application
or stress within the physiological environment [4,5].
Moreover, bone metabolism biomarkers represent
valuable tools for monitoring the complex dynamics
of bone remodeling. By mirroring the interplay
between resorption and formation, they provide
essential information on the molecular events that
govern bone turnover. Assessing these biomarkers
improves our comprehension of the mechanisms
involved in OTM and treatment-induced bone
responses [4,6].
The rising demand for aesthetic treatment options
has significantly contributed to the widespread use
of clear aligner therapy in orthodontics [7,8]. Clear
aligners represent one of the most frequently used
alternatives to fixed orthodontic appliances,
combining advantages such as enhanced aesthetics,
better oral hygiene maintenance, and increased
patient comfort [9]. Unlike fixed appliances,
aligners produce intermittent forces on teeth due to
their removability, and these forces tend to fluctuate
over time [10]. According to Kuncio et al. [11], tooth
movement achieved with aligners may not
correspond to the typical stages of orthodontic
movement outlined by Krishnan and Davidovitch
[12]. However, a major limitation of clear aligners is
that they are not suitable for treating all types of
malocclusions, particularly those requiring complex
tooth movements [13,14].
It is well established that cytokine activity and bone
metabolism biomarkers in GCF reflect biological
responses during orthodontic treatment with fixed
appliances, evidence concerning these biological
responses in patients undergoing clear aligner
therapy remains limited. This lack of consistent data
highlights the need for a comprehensive evaluation
of the molecular mechanisms underlying OTM with
aligners. Therefore, the aim of this systematic
review was to synthesize the available evidence on
cytokines and BMBs changes in GCF during
orthodontic treatment with clear aligners.
2. Materials and Methods
This systematic review was conducted in accordance
with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic
Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines
[15]. The protocol was prospectively registered in
the International Prospective Register of Systematic
Journal of Medical Sciences. 28 Apr, 2026 - Volume 14 | Issue 2. Electronic - ISSN: 2345-0592
134
Reviews (PROSPERO) under the identifier
CRD420251120919.
2.1 Focus Question
The focus question of this review was formulated in
accordance with the Population Intervention
Comparison Outcome-Study design (PICOS)
framework [16]. It investigated patients undergoing
orthodontic treatment (P) with clear aligners (I),
where changes in gingival crevicular fluid were
assessed across multiple treatment time points (C).
The outcomes (O) were defined as quantitative
alterations in the composition of GCF, particularly
in biomarkers related to inflammation and bone
metabolism. The review included prospective
clinical studies, comprising pilot, comparative and
cohort designs (S).
2.2 Eligibility Criteria
The inclusion criteria included:
Patients undergoing orthodontic treatment with
clear aligners;
Studies that evaluate changes in gingival
crevicular fluid (GCF) composition, particularly
levels of inflammatory or bone metabolism
biomarkers;
Participants without periodontal disease or
systemic conditions affecting periodontium;
Clinical full-text studies on human participants;
Articles published in English;
Original prospective clinical studies.
2.3 Exclusion criteria
The exclusion criteria included:
Studies involving only fixed orthodontic
appliances or removable appliances other than
clear aligners;
Studies that do not assess gingival crevicular
fluid (GCF) or do not report GCF-related
outcomes;
Studies involving participants diagnosed with
periodontitis, presenting clinical signs of active
periodontal disease, or systemic conditions that
could affect periodontal status;
Systematic reviews, meta-analyses, case reports.
2.4 Search strategy and study selection
The search for relevant articles was conducted in
five electronic databases, which included PubMed,
Science Direct, ProQuest, Web of Science and
Cohrane Library from July 1st until July 31, 2025.
For PubMed, the following search strategy was
applied: (gingival crevicular fluid) AND (clear
aligners OR aligners OR invisalign) AND
(inflammatory OR cytokine OR bone metabolism
OR biomarkers). The search strategy was
appropriately modified and applied to the other
electronic databases included in this review.
The process of study selection was independently
conducted by two reviewers. The procedure
involved an initial screening of titles and abstracts,
followed by full-text assessment of potentially
eligible articles. Duplicate records were identified
and removed using Zotero reference management
software version 7.0.24 (Corporation for Digital
Scholarship, USA). Any disagreements that arose
during this process were resolved through discussion
until consensus was achieved.
2.5 Data extraction
From each included study, data were extracted on
the main study characteristics, including author, year
of publication, country, study design, and study
population details (number of participants, sex
distribution, and mean age). Information was also
collected on aligner type, GCF sampling method,
and the GCF collection site. In addition, data
regarding the biomarkers analyzed, their temporal
changes during aligner therapy, and the main
conclusions were extracted.
Journal of Medical Sciences. 28 Apr, 2026 - Volume 14 | Issue 2. Electronic - ISSN: 2345-0592
135
2.6 Risk of bias assessment
Risk of bias in the included non-randomized studies
was assessed using the ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In
Non-randomized Studies of Interventions) tool
[17]. This instrument evaluates seven bias domains
and classifies the overall risk of bias for each study
as low, moderate, serious, or critical.
3.1. Results
3.1 Study selection
A total of 403 records were identified through
electronic database searches. After duplicates were
removed, 374 articles were screened for eligibility
based on titles and abstracts. Of these, 360 articles
were excluded according to the predefined criteria.
In total, 9 studies fulfilled all inclusion criteria and
were included in this systematic review.
3.2 Study charasteristics
The main characteristics of the included studies are
summarized in Table 1. All included articles were
designed as prospective studies, comprising pilot
studies [18-20], comparative studies [4,21,22],
observational studies [25,26], and one cohort study
[25]. Collectively, the studies assessed 152 patients
undergoing orthodontic treatment with clear
aligners. Sample sizes ranged from 10 to 30
participants per study, with an average of
approximately 17 participants. Age
and sex reporting were inconsistent across studies:
while some studies reported both mean age and age
range, others provided only one of these measures,
and in several cases, age was presented for overall
study population rather than specifically for the clear
aligner group. Two studies did not specify the sex
distribution of participants [20, 25].
Most studies specified the use of Invisalign® clear
aligners, while one study investigated aligners
manufactured by K Line [20]. A few studies did not
report the manufacturer or brand [21,22,24].
Gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) was collected using
either PerioPaper® strips or microcapillary pipettes,
with sample isolation achieved using cotton rolls,
sterile gauze, or gentle air-drying. Sampling sites
varied widely, including maxillary and mandibular
incisors, molars, and canines (Table 1).
Table 1. Characteristics of included studies.
Publication
Study
Design
The Study
Sample:
Patients
(M/F); Mean
Age (Years)
Aligner
Type
GCF
Sampling
Protocol
GCF
Collection
Site
Castroflorio
et al., 2016
[18]
Prospective
split-mouth
clinical pilot
study
10 patients; 5/5;
mean age 22.3
± 3.3 years
Invisalign
PerioPaper
®
strips for
30 seconds;
cotton rolls
and a gentle
stream of air
Mesiobuccal
and
distobuccal
sites of
second molar
Chami et
al., 2018
[19]
Prospective
pilot study
11 patients; 5/6;
mean age 23.63
± 4.88 years
Invisalign
PerioPaper
®
strips for
30 seconds;
cotton rolls
and a gentle
stream of air
Vestibular
surface of
lower central
incisors and
lateral
incisors
Gujar et al.,
2019 [21]
Prospective
comparative
study
20 patients
(aligner group);
9/11; mean age
not reported for
NR
A micro-
capillary
pipette
Proximal site
of maxillary
canine
Journal of Medical Sciences. 28 Apr, 2026 - Volume 14 | Issue 2. Electronic - ISSN: 2345-0592
136
aligner group
(overall study
sample mean
age 28 ± 4
years)
(1 μL); sterile
gauze
Aziz, et al.,
2020 [20]
Prospective
clinical pilot
study
10 patients;
M/F not
specified; mean
age not
reported
K line
PerioPaper
®
strips for
60 seconds;
cotton roll
and a gentle
stream of air
Distolabial
sulcus of the
lower incisor
Chen et al.,
2021 [23]
Prospective
observational
study
14 patients
(aligner group);
7/7; mean age
10.8 ± 0.9 years
Invisalign
PerioPaper®
strips for 30
seconds;
cotton roll
and a gentle
stream of air
Mesiobuccal
sulcus of the
maxillary
first molar
Baeshen,
2022 [25]
Prospective
cohort study
20 patients
(aligner group);
M/F not
specified; mean
age not
reported (age
range of 1232
years reported
for overall
study sample
only)
Invisalign
A micro-
capillary
pipette
(1 μL); sterile
gauze
Proximal
region of
canines in the
maxillary
arch
Kamran et
al., 2023
[22]
Prospective
comparative
study
25 patients
(aligner group);
15/10; mean
age 25 ± 4
years
NR
A micro-
capillary
pipette
(1 μL); sterile
gauze
Proximal site
of maxillary
canine
Alnazeh et
al., 2023 [4]
Prospective
comparative
study
30 patients
(aligner group);
10/20; mean
age not
reported
separately (age
range of 1832
years and mean
age 25 ± 3
years reported
for overall
study sample
only)
Invisalign
A micro-
capillary
pipette (1 μL)
under aseptic
conditions;
sterile gauze
Proximal site
of maxillary
canine
Altındal et
al., 2024
[24]
Prospective
observational
study
15 patients;
10/5; mean age
27.4 ± 6.52
years
NR
PerioPaper
®
strips for
60 seconds;
cotton rolls
Right upper
first molar
and left
lower central
incisor
F, female; GCF, gingival crevicular fluid; M, male; NR, not reported.
Journal of Medical Sciences. 28 Apr, 2026 - Volume 14 | Issue 2. Electronic - ISSN: 2345-0592
137
3.3 Results of individual studies
The main outcomes of the nine included studies are
summarized and presented in Table 2. All studies
assessed biomarker changes in GCF during the
initial phase of orthodontic treatment with clear
aligners. Inflammatory cytokines were assessed in
every study, while three studies [18,22,23]
additionally evaluated bone metabolism biomarkers.
The following sections provide a detailed synthesis
of the findings, grouped by biomarker category.
3.3.1 Inflammatory biomarkers
The inflammatory biomarkers investigated across
the nine included studies comprised interleukin-1
beta (IL-1β), interleukin-1 alpha (IL-1α), tumor
necrosis factor- alpha (TNF-α), interleukin-6 (IL-6),
interleukin-8 (IL-8), interleukin-2 (IL-2),
interleukin-17 (IL-17), and granulocyte-
macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF).
IL- were the most frequently studied cytokine,
evaluated in seven studies. Of these, five studies
reported statistically significant increases during
clear aligner therapy, though the timing of peak
expression varied across studies. Aziz et al. [20]
observed a sharp elevation as early as day 1, while
Castroflorio et al. [18] reported significant increases
at day 7 and day 21. Gujar et al. [21] and Baeshen
[25] also identified elevated levels by day 21, and
Kamran et al. [22] reported significant changes
at day 28.
TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-8 were each investigated in five
studies. Gujar et al. [21] and Baeshen [25] reported
statistically significant increases in all three
cytokines 21 days after treatment initiation. Kamran
et al. [22] also evaluated all three markers and
observed peak levels at day 28, while Alnazeh et al.
[4] identified a marked rise in IL-6 at day 28.
Altındal et al. [24] further reported notable
elevations in IL-6 and IL-8 during a 21-day
observation period.
Other inflammatory cytokines were evaluated less
frequently across the included studies. IL- and IL-
2 were analyzed in three studies [21,22,25], all of
which reported statistically significant increases
during the initial phase of aligner therapy. IL-17 and
GM-CSF were each evaluated in two studies [4,19];
however, significant changes were observed in only
one of these investigations for each biomarker [4].
Two of the nine included studies did not identify any
statistically significant changes in the analyzed
biomarkers. Chami et al. [19] reported no significant
alterations in IL-1β, IL-8, TNF-α, IL-17, or GM-
CSF levels during the observation period, while
Chen et al. [23] also reported no significant
differences in IL- or TNF-α concentrations.
3.3.2 Bone metabolism biomarkers
Three of the included studies [18,22,23] evaluated
bone metabolism biomarkers in GCF, specifically
assessed RANKL (receptor activator of nuclear
factor kappa-B ligand), OPG (osteoprotegerin), and
OPN (osteopontin). Castroflorio et al. [18] reported
significant increases in RANKL at days 7 and 21
after treatment initiation, accompanied by decreased
OPG and elevated OPN levels during the same
period. Kamran et al. [22] observed a similar pattern,
with significant increases in RANKL and OPN and
a decrease in OPG at day 28. Chen et al. [23]
analyzed RANKL and OPG only and reported no
significant changes in either marker throughout the
study period.
3.4 Quality assessment
The results of the risk of bias assessment for the
included non-randomized studies are summarized in
Table 3. According to the ROBINS-I tool, two
studies were identified as having a serious overall
risk of bias due to inadequate control of confounding
factors [22,27], while the remaining studies were
consistently rated as having moderate overall risk of
bias.
Journal of Medical Sciences. 28 Apr, 2026 - Volume 14 | Issue 2. Electronic - ISSN: 2345-0592
138
Table 2. Outcomes.
Publication
Stage of
Orthodontic
Treatment
Biomarkers
Analyzed
Biomarker
Changes
Conclusions
Castroflorio et al.,
2016 [18]
Before treatment
1 hour of treatment
7 days of treatment
21 days of
treatment
IL-1β, RANKL,
OPG, OPN
Statistically
significant
increases were
observed in IL-
levels at pressure
sites after 7 and 21
days, in RANKL
levels at both
pressure and
tension sites after 1
hour and 7 days,
and in TGF-β1 and
OPN levels at
tension sites after
21 days. OPG
levels significantly
decreased at both
pressure and
tension sites after 7
and 21 days
compared with
baseline.
Clear aligner
therapy may
induce early
increases in
inflammatory and
bone metabolism
biomarkers, while
some markers may
show a decreasing
trend, during the
initial treatment
phase.
Chami et al., 2018
[19]
Before treatment
1 day of treatment
7 days of treatment
21 days of
treatment
IL-, IL-8, TNF-
α, IL-17, GM-CSF
No statistically
significant changes
were observed in
IL-1β, IL-8, IL-17,
TNF-α or GM-CSF
levels throughout
the 21-day period.
Although non-
significant, a
decreasing trend
over time was
noted for all these
GCF biomarkers.
Clear aligner
therapy may
induce a limited
inflammatory
response, with
minimal changes
observed in
biomarker levels
during the initial
phase of treatment.
Gujar et al., 2019
[21]
Before treatment
21 days of
treatment
IL-1β, IL-1α, IL-2,
IL-6, IL-8, TNF-α
Statistically
significant
increases were
observed in all six
cytokines in the
aligner group after
21 days of
treatment, with IL-
1β and TNF-α
showing the most
prominent changes,
and IL-
exhibiting the
least.
Clear aligner
therapy appears to
elicit an
inflammatory
response during the
initial phase of
orthodontic
treatment.
Journal of Medical Sciences. 28 Apr, 2026 - Volume 14 | Issue 2. Electronic - ISSN: 2345-0592
139
Aziz et al., 2020
[20]
Before treatment
1 day of treatment
3 days of treatment
7 days of treatment
21 days of
treatment
IL-
IL-1β levels
significantly
increased at day 1
(peak) compared to
before treatment
and remained
elevated through
days 3, 7, and 21.
Clear aligners may
induce a sustained
short-term
inflammatory
response during the
initial phase of
treatment.
Chen et al., 2021
[23]
Before treatment
1 hour of treatment
7 days of treatment
14 days of
treatment
IL-1β, TNF-α,
RANKL, OPG
No statistically
significant changes
in IL-1β, TNF-α,
RANKL and OPG
expression levels
were observed in
the aligner group
across all time
points.
Clear aligner
therapy did not
induce statistically
significant changes
in either pro-
inflammatory
cytokines or bone
metabolism
biomarkers during
the initial phase of
treatment.
Baeshen, 2022
[25]
Before treatment
21 days of
treatment
IL-1β, IL-1α, IL-2,
IL-6, IL-8, TNF-α
Statistically
significant
increases were
observed in all six
inflammatory
cytokines in the
aligner group, with
IL-1β and TNF-α
showing the most
prominent changes,
and IL-1α, IL-6
and IL-8 the least.
Clear aligner
therapy could be
associated with a
short-term increase
in inflammatory
cytokines during
the initial treatment
phase.
Kamran et al.,
2023 [22]
Before treatment
28 days of
treatment
IL-1β, IL-1α, IL-2,
IL-6, IL-8, TNF-α,
RANKL, OPG,
OPN
Statistically
significant
increases were
observed in all six
inflammatory
cytokines and in
two bone
metabolism
biomarkers in the
aligner group, with
IL-2 and IL-
showing the most
prominent
increases among
cytokines. OPG
showed the most
prominent
statistically
significant
decrease among
bone biomarkers,
while IL-8 and
OPN exhibited the
smallest changes.
Clear aligner
therapy may
induce a short-term
inflammatory
response and
simultaneous
alterations in bone
metabolism
biomarker levels
during the initial
phase of
orthodontic
treatment.
Journal of Medical Sciences. 28 Apr, 2026 - Volume 14 | Issue 2. Electronic - ISSN: 2345-0592
140
Alnazeh et al.,
2023 [4]
Before treatment
28 days of
treatment
IL-6, IL-17, GM-
CSF
IL-6, IL-17 and
GM-CSF levels
statistically
significantly
increased after 28
days of clear
aligner treatment
compared to
baseline, with the
most prominent
change observed in
IL-17.
Clear aligner
therapy appears to
trigger a short-term
inflammatory
response during the
initial phase of
treatment.
Altındal et al.,
2024 [24]
Before treatment
1 hour of treatment
3 days of treatment
7 days of treatment
14 days of
treatment
21 days of
treatment
IL-6, IL-8
Statistically
significant
differences were
observed in IL-8
levels between pre-
treatment, day 3,
and day 7
compared with day
21. IL-6 levels
significantly
increased at days
14 and 21
compared to pre-
treatment.
Clear aligner
therapy may
induce early
inflammatory
response, with
biomarker levels
showing
progressive
increases over the
initial treatment
period.
GM-CSF, granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor; IL 1α, interleukin-1 alpha; IL 1β, interleukin-1
beta; IL-2, interleukin-2; Il-6, interleukin-6; Il-8, interleukin-8; IL-17, interleukin-17; OPG, osteoprotegerin;
OPN, osteopontin; RANKL, receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligand; TNF α, tumor necrosis factor
alpha.
Table 3. RISK of bias assessment using ROBINS-I tool.
Risk of bias domains
D1
D2
D3
D4
D5
D6
D7
Overal
l
Study
Castroflorio et al., 2016
[20]
+
+
+
+
+
+
Chami et al., 2018 [21]
+
+
+
+
+
Gujar et al., 2019 [23]
+
+
+
+
Aziz et al., 2020 [22]
X
+
+
+
X
Chen et al., 2021 [25]
+
+
+
+
Baeshen, 2022 [27]
X
+
+
+
+
+
X
Kamran et al., 2023 [24]
+
+
+
+
+
Alnazeh et al., 2023 [4]
+
+
+
+
Altındal et al., 2024 [24]
+
+
+
+
+
Domains:
D1: Bias due to confounding.
D2: Bias due to selection of participants.
D3: Bias in classification of interventions.
D4: Bias due to deviations from intended
interventions.
D5: Bias due to missing data.
D6: Bias in measurement of outcomes.
D7: Bias in selection of reported result.
Judgement
X Serious
Moderate
+ Low
Journal of Medical Sciences. 28 Apr, 2026 - Volume 14 | Issue 2. Electronic - ISSN: 2345-0592
141
4. Discussion
This systematic review aimed to synthesize the
available evidence on cytokine and bone metabolism
biomarker levels in gingival crevicular fluid (GCF)
following the application of orthodontic forces by
clear aligners. Analysis of GCF provides an
advantageous approach for investigating such
responses in human in vivo studies, as it is
noninvasive and allows repetitive sampling from the
same site without limitations on the number of
collections. This enables longitudinal monitoring of
molecular changes at a single site over time [26].
Fluctuations in inflammatory and bone metabolism
biomarker levels in GCF may reflect not only the
response to orthodontic forces but also the presence
of subclinical periodontal inflammation [27]. Since
the composition and quantity of GCF are altered
during periodontal inflammation, ensuring optimal
periodontal conditions is essential to avoid bias in
biomarker quantification. In this review, all the
included studies examined participants with
clinically healthy periodontal tissues, thereby
minimizing this potential confounding factor.
Cytokine fluctuations collectively reflect the
inflammatory and bone remodeling response to
orthodontic forces, but analysis of individual
mediators allows a more precise interpretation of
mechanisms underlying clear aligner treatment.
Among the cytokines examined across the included
studies, IL- emerged as the most frequently
investigated [18-23,25], consistent with its
recognized role as a central mediator of orthodontic
tooth movement [5]. As a pro-inflammatory
cytokine, IL- specifically promotes osteoclast
differentiation, enhances their fusion and survival,
and stimulates their resorptive activity [5].
Clinically, this activity initiates bone resorption and
contributes to the rapid phase of early tooth
movement following the application of orthodontic
force [28]. In the present review, the majority of
included studies reported a statistically significant
increase in IL-1β levels during clear aligner therapy
[18,20-22,25], whereas two studies did not observe
such changes [19,23]. Among the included studies,
Aziz et al. [20] uniquely reported a clear peak at day
one, with the concept of an early-phase IL-
response. An early peak in IL-levels at around 24
hours has also been reported with other orthodontic
force systems, including elastic separators [29],
microimplants [30], and cantilever springs [31],
supporting its role as a general early mediator of
mechanical stress. When compared across
orthodontic systems, clear aligners generally
induced a lower magnitude of IL- expression.
Gujar et al. [21] and Kamran et al. [22] reported
greater IL- release with fixed labial appliances,
while Chen et al. [23] found a more pronounced
increase with pendulum appliances. Baeshen et al.
[25] similarly observed higher levels with lingual
appliances, and in this case the differences reached
statistical significance. Taken together, these
findings suggest that although clear aligners trigger
IL-1β release, the response appears weaker than that
elicited by conventional or alternative fixed systems.
Other pro-inflammatory cytokines investigated in
the included studies, such as IL-6, IL-8, IL-2, TNF-
α, and IL-1α, also participate in the orchestration of
periodontal inflammation and bone remodeling
during the early phase of OTM [32,33]. Among
these, IL-6 was the most frequently assessed
cytokine, showing significant increases in all studies
[4,21,22,24,25], typically within the first 24 weeks
of clear aligner therapy. This pattern contrasts with
evidence from fixed appliance studies, where IL-6
has frequently been shown to peak much earlier,
within 1-3 days after force application [26,34,35].
IL-8, a chemokine involved in neutrophil
recruitment [28], showed a response pattern similar
to IL-6, with most studies reporting significant
increases at later stages of aligner therapy
Journal of Medical Sciences. 28 Apr, 2026 - Volume 14 | Issue 2. Electronic - ISSN: 2345-0592
142
[21,22,25]. While Altındal et al. [24] observed
earlier IL-8 elevations at days 3 and 7, studies
employing other orthodontic force systems [36,37]
reported significant increases within 2448 hours.
IL-8 is secreted by various cells including
monocytes, endothelial cells, and fibroblasts as a
response to TNF-α and IL-[22]. In addition, TNF-
α, IL-1α, and IL-2 were evaluated across the same
set of studies, with statistically significant increases
consistently reported by Gujar et al. [21], Kamran et
al. [22], and Baeshen et al. [25]. In studies
employing other orthodontic force systems, TNF-α
and IL-2 typically exhibited an early peak within 24
hours after force application [35,36,38], while IL-
showed a transient rise that did not reach statistical
significance [39]. Across comparative studies, IL-
and TNF-α tended to show greater increases with
fixed appliances (labial or lingual) than with aligners
[21,25], whereas IL-6, IL-2 and IL-8 responses were
in some reports more pronounced with aligners
[4,22]. These divergent patterns likely reflect
differences in the timing of cytokine release, with
fixed appliances inducing stronger immediate pro-
inflammatory signals, whereas aligner studies
predominantly report elevations at later time points,
possibly because early peaks were not captured due
to sampling schedules. Additionally, Başaran et al.
[40] reported that the expression of IL-6, IL-2, and
IL-8 was influenced by both the duration and
magnitude of orthodontic force, highlighting the role
of force parameters in modulating cytokine
responses.
IL-17 is a relatively recently identified cytokine with
a pivotal role in bone remodeling and in modulating
cell-mediated immune responses, particularly by
directing the shift toward antigen-specific effector
responses [5]. Across the included studies, findings
were inconsistent: one trial demonstrated a
significant late increase after 28 days of aligner
therapy [4], whereas another did not detect relevant
changes [19]. Similar early, transient increases in
IL-17 have also been observed with other
orthodontic force systems, such as the Hyrax
appliance, suggesting that this cytokine may
participate in the early phase of mechanical stress
induced remodeling [41]. GM-CSF, another pro-
inflammatory mediator implicated in bone
remodeling [42], was assessed in the same two
studies and showed a response pattern consistent
with IL-17 [4,19]. Overall, the evidence regarding
these cytokines remains scarce, and further research
is required to clarify their roles during orthodontic
tooth movement.
Beyond pro-inflammatory cytokines, biomarkers of
bone metabolism offer additional insights into the
molecular mechanism of orthodontic tooth
movement. The remodeling process is regulated by
the equilibrium between RANKL-mediated
signaling and osteoprotegerin (OPG) production
[43]. OPG is secreted by osteoblasts as well as
RANKL and functions as a decoy receptor,
competing with RANK for RANKL binding [44].
Application of compressive forces to human
periodontal ligament (PDL) cells has been
demonstrated to increased RANKL and reduced
OPG secretion, with these responses varying
according to both force magnitude and duration [44].
These biomarkers were assessed in several studies
with partly divergent results [18,22,23]. OPG levels
showed a decreasing trend: Castroflorio et al. [18]
observed significant reductions after 7 and 21 days,
while Kamran et al. [22] at 28 days. Regarding
RANKL, Castroflorio et al. [18] detected a
significant rise as early as one hour after force
application and again at day 7, whereas Kamran et
al. [22] found a significant elevation after 28 days.
In the study by Chen et al. [23] a decrease in OPG
together with an increase in RANKL was noted after
7 days, although these changes did not reach
statistical significance. Alongside these mediators,
Journal of Medical Sciences. 28 Apr, 2026 - Volume 14 | Issue 2. Electronic - ISSN: 2345-0592
143
osteopontin (OPN) has been studied as another
indicator of bone remodeling. It is a non-collagenous
bone protein that participates in early osteoblast
differentiation, contributes to biomineralization,
regulates RANKL expression, and can inhibit
osteoclast activity [18]. In our review, OPN levels
showed a significant increase 21 days after force
application in Castroflorio et al. [18] and at 28 days
in Kamran et al. [22].
Several limitations should be considered when
interpreting the present findings, as the overall
methodological quality of the included studies
ranged from moderate to serious. All authors
reported certain constraints, most related to
relatively small sample sizes and short observation
periods, which limited the evaluation of longer-term
biomarker dynamics. In addition, there was
considerable heterogeneity in the timing and
frequency of GCF sampling in some studies,
samples were collected only before treatment and at
a single late time point (e.g., 21 or 28 days)
potentially overlooking early transient cytokine
fluctuations. Individual biological responses to
mechanical loading are known to vary with factors
such as age, sex, and bone density; however, some
studies lacked detailed demographic information,
such as the age range and mean age of participants
in the aligner group, and some did not specify the
distribution of males and females, which may limit
the interpretation of biological variability in
biomarker responses. Although all studies included
participants with clinically healthy periodontal
tissues, the possibility of subclinical, bacteria-
induced inflammatory changes in GCF composition
cannot be entirely excluded, given that the oral
environment is never completely free of microbial
activity [41]. Moreover, variations in study design,
applied orthodontic force levels, and aligner wear
protocols may have further contributed to the
heterogeneity observed in biomarker responses. To
strengthen the current evidence base, future research
should focus on larger, methodologically consistent
trials with standardized protocols and longer follow-
up intervals.
5. Conclusion
Based on the current evidence, orthodontic
treatment with clear aligners is associated with
measurable alterations in inflammatory cytokines
and bone metabolism biomarkers during the early
phase of treatment. These findings support the
concept that aligner therapy elicits a biologically
active response within periodontal tissues. Although
the clinical implications of these molecular changes
remain incompletely understood, their presence
underscores the biological relevance of aligner-
mediated tooth movement and highlights the need
for well-designed longitudinal studies to clarify their
impact on treatment outcomes and patient well-
being.
References
1. Li Y, Zhan Q, Bao M, Yi J, Li Y.
Biomechanical and biological responses of
periodontium in orthodontic tooth movement:
update in a new decade. Int J Oral
Sci. 2021;13(1):20.
2. Cm AR, Ghonmode S, Powar S, Rajput P,
Chaudhary P, Iii AR, et al. Association between
different biomarkers and initial orthodontic tooth
movement in children and adults: a systematic
review and meta-analysis. Cureus. 2025;17(2).
3. Gupta S, Siddharth M, Gupta R, Sharma P,
Thakur S, Gupta R. Gingival crevicular fluidA
medium for diagnosis: an overview. J Chem Health
Risks. 2025;15(3):25316.
4. Alnazeh AA, Kamran MA, Aseeri Y,
Alrwuili MR, Aljabab MA, Baig EA, et al. Levels of
inflammatory and bone metabolic markers in the
gingival crevicular fluid of individuals undergoing
Journal of Medical Sciences. 28 Apr, 2026 - Volume 14 | Issue 2. Electronic - ISSN: 2345-0592
144
fixed orthodontic treatment in comparison to those
utilizing Invisalign. Medicina
(Kaunas). 2023;59(12).
5. Kitaura H, Ohori F, Marahleh A, Ma J, Lin
A, Fan Z, et al. The role of cytokines in orthodontic
tooth movement. Int J Mol Sci. 2025;26(14):6688.
6. Cazzolla AP, Brescia V, Lovero R, Fontana
A, Giustino A, Dioguardi M, et al. Evaluation of
biomarkers of bone metabolism on salivary matrix
in the remodeling of periodontal tissue during
orthodontic treatment. Dent J.2024;12(7):209.
7. Tartaglia GM, Mapelli A, Maspero C,
Santaniello T, Serafin M, Farronato M, et al. Direct
3D printing of clear orthodontic aligners: current
state and future
possibilities. Materials. 2021;14(7):1799.
8. Livas C, Pazhman FS, Ilbeyli Z, Pandis N.
Perceived esthetics and value of clear aligner
therapy systems: a survey among dental school
instructors and undergraduate students. Dent Press J
Orthod. 2023;28:e232225.
9. Hartogsohn CR, Sonnesen L. Clear aligner
treatment: indications, advantages, and adverse
effectsa systematic review. Dent
J. 2025;13(1):40.
10. Cremonini F, Pancari C, Brucculeri L,
Karami Shabankare A, Lombardo L. Force
expressed by 3D-printed aligners with different
thickness and design compared to thermoformed
aligners: an in vitro study. Appl
Sci. 2025;15(6):2911.
11. Kuncio D, Maganzini A, Shelton C,
Freeman K. Invisalign and traditional orthodontic
treatment postretention outcomes compared using
the American Board of Orthodontics objective
grading system. Angle Orthod. 2007;77(5):8649.
12. Krishnan V, Davidovitch Z. Cellular,
molecular, and tissue-level reactions to orthodontic
force. Am J Orthod Dentofacial
Orthop. 2006;129(4):469.e1469.e32.
13. Putrino A, Barbato E, Galluccio G. Clear
aligners: between evolution and efficiencya
scoping review. Int J Environ Res Public
Health. 2021;18(6):2870.
14. Alwafi A, Bichu YM, Avanessian A, Adel
SM, Vaid NR, Zou B. Overview of systematic
reviews and meta-analyses assessing the
predictability and clinical effectiveness of clear
aligner therapy. Dent Rev. 2023;3(4):100074.
15. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM,
Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The
PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for
reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71.
16. Amir-Behghadami M, Janati A.
Population, intervention, comparison, outcomes and
study (PICOS) design as a framework to formulate
eligibility criteria in systematic reviews. Emerg Med
J. 2020;37(6):387.
17. Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC,
Savović J, Berkman ND, Viswanathan M, et al.
ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-
randomised studies of
interventions. BMJ. 2016;355:i4919.
18. Castroflorio T, Gamerro EF, Caviglia GP,
Deregibus A. Biochemical markers of bone
metabolism during early orthodontic tooth
movement with aligners. Angle
Orthod. 2017;87(1):7481.
19. Chami V de O, Nunes L, Capelli Júnior J.
Expression of cytokines in gingival crevicular fluid
associated with tooth movement induced by
aligners: a pilot study. Dent Press J
Orthod. 2018;23(5):416.
20. Aziz SB, Singh G. Cytokine levels in
gingival crevicular fluid samples of patients wearing
clear aligners. J Oral Biol Craniofacial
Res. 2020;10(2):199202.
21. Gujar AN, Baeshen HA, Alhazmi A,
Bhandi S, Raj AT, Patil S, et al. Cytokine levels in
gingival crevicular fluid during orthodontic
Journal of Medical Sciences. 28 Apr, 2026 - Volume 14 | Issue 2. Electronic - ISSN: 2345-0592
145
treatment with aligners compared to conventional
labial fixed appliances: a 3-week clinical study. Acta
Odontol Scand. 2019;77(6):47481.
22. Kamran MA, Alnazeh AA, Almagbol M,
Almoammar S, Alhaizaey AHA, Alshahrani I. Role
of six cytokines and bone metabolism biomarkers in
gingival crevicular fluid in patients undergoing fixed
orthodontic appliance treatment in comparison with
aligners: a clinical study. Angle
Orthod. 2023;93(3):33540.
23. Chen H, Liu L, Li Y, Guo L, Sun D.
Comparison of cytokine level changes in gingival
crevicular fluid between the aligner and pendulum
appliance during early molar distalization: a
prospective observational study. J Orofac
Orthop.2023;84(4):24351.
24. Altındal D, Tunca Y, Tunca M. Evaluation
of IL-8 and IL-6 levels in gingival crevicular fluid
of individuals undergoing clear aligner
therapy. Angle Orthod. 2025;95(2):2128.
25. Baeshen HA. GCF cytokine profile
comparison between patients with lingual fixed
appliances and aligners. J King Saud Univ
Sci. 2022;34(6):102075.
26. Madureira DF, Da Silva JM, Teixeira AL,
Abreu MHNG, Pretti H, Lages EMB, et al. Cytokine
measurements in gingival crevicular fluid and
periodontal ligament: are they correlated? Am J
Orthod Dentofacial Orthop.2015;148(2):293301.
27. Bibi T, Khurshid Z, Rehman A, Imran E,
Srivastava KC, Shrivastava D. Gingival crevicular
fluid (GCF): a diagnostic tool for the detection of
periodontal health and
diseases. Molecules. 2021;26(5):1208.
28. Varughese N, Krishnakumar K, Shree KH,
Subramanian AK, Ramadoss R. Proinflammatory
and anti-inflammatory cytokines in modulating bone
remodeling during orthodontic tooth
movement. JADA Found Sci. 2025;4:100054.
29. Vujacic A, Konic A, Pavlovic J, Todorovic
V, Vukicevic V, Jevremovic D, et al. Differences in
IL-and IL-6 levels in the gingival crevicular fluid
during acute phase of orthodontic tooth movement
between juveniles and young adults. Vojnosanit
Pregl. 2017;74(3):21926.
30. Camarena Fonseca A, Gallegos Salazar
GS, Melgar Gutierrez JC, Inga Peña R, Colarossi
Salinas AC, Meneses López A. Multiplex
measurement of proinflammatory cytokines around
miniscrews during orthodontic treatment. Rev
Estomatol Hered. 2022;32(3):24554.
31. Ahuja R, Almuzian M, Khan A, Pascovici
D, Dalci O, Darendeliler MA. A preliminary
investigation of short-term cytokine expression in
gingival crevicular fluid secondary to high-level
orthodontic forces and associated root
resorption. Prog Orthod. 2017;18(1):23.
32. Rody WJ, Wijegunasinghe M, Wiltshire
WA, Dufault B. Differences in the gingival
crevicular fluid composition between adults and
adolescents undergoing orthodontic
treatment. Angle Orthod. 2014;84(1):1206.
33. Baeshen HA. Assessment of salivary
proinflammatory cytokines profile level in patients
treated with labial and lingual fixed orthodontic
appliances. PLOS ONE. 2021;16(4):e0249999.
34. Ren Y, Maltha JC, Van’t Hof MA, Von
Den Hoff JW, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM, Zhang D.
Cytokine levels in crevicular fluid are less
responsive to orthodontic force in adults than in
juveniles. J Clin Periodontol. 2002;29(8):75762.
35. Ren Y, Hazemeijer H, De Haan B, Qu N,
De Vos P. Cytokine profiles in crevicular fluid
during orthodontic tooth movement of short and
long durations. J Periodontol. 2007;78(3):4538.
36. Hamamci N, Acun Kaya F, Uysal E, Yokus
B. Identification of interleukin-2, -6, and -8 levels
around miniscrews during orthodontic tooth
movement. Eur J Orthod. 2012;34(3):35761.
Journal of Medical Sciences. 28 Apr, 2026 - Volume 14 | Issue 2. Electronic - ISSN: 2345-0592
146
37. Leethanakul C, Kittichaikarn C,
Charoemratrote C, Jitpukdeebodintra S. Effects of
continuous and interrupted orthodontic force on
interleukin-1β and interleukin-8 secretion in human
gingival crevicular fluid. J Oral
Biosci.2008;50(4):2308.
38. Kaya FA, Hamamcı N, Uysal E, Yokuş B.
Identification of tumor necrosis factor-α levels
around miniscrews during canine
distalization. Korean J Orthod. 2011;41(1):36.
39. De Aguiar MCS, Perinetti G, Capelli J. The
gingival crevicular fluid as a source of biomarkers to
enhance efficiency of orthodontic and functional
treatment of growing patients. Biomed Res
Int. 2017;2017:3257235.
40. Başaran G, Özer T, Kaya FA, Hamamci O.
Interleukins-2, -6, and -8 levels in human gingival
sulcus during orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod
Dentofacial Orthop. 2006;130(1):7.e17.e6.
41. Allgayer S, Macedo De Menezes L, Batista
EL. Interleukin-17 and interleukin-23 levels are
modulated by compressive orthodontic forces in
humans. J World Fed Orthod. 2019;8(4):14852.
42. Nunes L, Quintanilha L, Perinetti G,
Capelli J. Effect of orthodontic force on expression
levels of ten cytokines in gingival crevicular
fluid. Arch Oral Biol. 2017;76:705.
43. Nugraha AP, Ernawati DS, Narmada IB,
Bramantoro T, Riawan W, Situmorang PC, et al.
RANKRANKLOPG expression after gingival
mesenchymal stem cell hypoxia preconditioned
application in an orthodontic tooth movement
animal model. J Oral Biol Craniofacial Res.
2023;13(6):78190.
44. Inchingolo F, Inchingolo AM, Malcangi G,
Ferrante L, Trilli I, Di Noia A, et al. The interaction
of cytokines in orthodontics: a systematic
review. Appl Sci. 2024;14(12):5133.
Journal of Medical Sciences. 28 Apr, 2026 - Volume 14 | Issue 2. Electronic - ISSN: 2345-0592
147