2D MoS2-Conformal 3D-Printed Platform for Dual Phototherapy and Bone Regeneration

2D MoS2-Conformal 3D-Printed Platform for Dual Phototherapy and Bone Regeneration | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article 2D MoS2-Conformal 3D-Printed Platform for Dual Phototherapy and Bone Regeneration Jong Hwa Seo, In ho Choi, Hyun Lee, Seojoon Bang, Hyeong Seok Kang, and 20 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-9575873/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 4 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Osteosarcoma has a poor prognosis owing to its aggressive metastasis and high recurrence rates. Consequently, recurrence due to residual cancer cells is common even after surgical resection, necessitating structural and functional reconstruction of extensive bone defects. Particularly for irregular defects, site-specific design is essential to ensure anatomical conformity, and there remains an urgent need for theragenerative approach which simultaneously provides structural reconstruction and functional eradication of residual cancer cells. Herein, a 3D-printed theragenerative polyetheretherketone (PEEK) scaffold is presented, in which a patient-specific structure is constructed from fabricated PEEK filaments and subsequently integrated with biofunctional 2D molybdenum disulfide (MoS 2 ) as a surface interface to impart enhanced bioactivity and photo-responsiveness. MoS 2 was synthesized as a two-dimensional monolayer based on a molybdenum dioxide nanoparticle precursor via nanoseed-initiated atmospheric pressure chemical vapor deposition (APCVD) and then integrated onto the 3D-printed PEEK using a polymer-assisted transfer method. The fabricated 2D MoS 2 -conformal 3D-printed PEEK scaffold enabled simultaneous photothermal and photodynamic therapy through MoS 2 -based photoresponsive properties. Under dual-wavelength irradiation, this combined phototherapy effectively induced pronounced cancer cell apoptosis and exhibited antibacterial performance through the synergistic effects of localized hyperthermia and reactive oxygen species generation. In contrast, under the same photothermal stimulation, pre-osteoblasts and vascular endothelial cells exhibited enhanced attachment, proliferation, and differentiation. Therefore, this theragenerative system represents a promising platform capable of simultaneously achieving residual cancer tumor suppression, infection control, and tissue regeneration, thereby offering a patient-specific bone reconstruction strategy after osteosarcoma resection. 3D printing PEEK scaffold 2D monolayer MoS2 Dual-phototherapy Osteosarcoma treatment Antibacterial activity Vascularized bone regeneration Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 1. Introduction Osteosarcoma is a malignant bone tumor that primarily affects pediatric, and adolescents populations because of its aggressive local infiltration and high susceptibility to early systemic metastasis, requiring advanced therapeutic treatments beyond conventional strategies [ 1 , 2 ]. Wide surgical resection is one of the most commonly used treatment approaches, however, it often results in extensive postoperative bone defects [ 1 ], which can cause a long-term functional disorder and increase the risk of reconstructive failure [ 3 ]. In addition, post-resectional implant integration carries several clinical risks [ 3 ]. The surgical site may be vulnerable to bacterial infection due to reduced blood flow, a weakened immune response, and excessive inflammation [ 3 , 4 ]. Notably, delayed bone regeneration and dead space facilitate biofilm maturation leading to chronic infection and implant failure [ 4 ]. In addition, the potential for minimal residual disease represents a critical oncological challenge, which increases the risk of local recurrence, imposing severe burden on patients and impacting their long-term quality of life [ 1 ]. Furthermore, because bone defect geometries vary significantly between patients following osteosarcoma resection, there is a critical need for patient-specific implant designs tailored to these individual defect characteristics [ 3 , 4 ]. Consequently, following osteosarcoma resection, there is a need to develop patient-specific, bone implants that can simultaneously achieve tumor control and bone regeneration while preventing infection and recurrence. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) has attracted considerable attention as a candidate material for orthopedic implants owing to its bone-like elastic modulus, excellent mechanical strength, chemical stability and relatively low imaging artifacts in computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) [ 5 – 9 ]. In particular, PEEK can mitigate stress shielding phenomenon effectively compared with conventional metallic implants due to its similar elastic modulus with that of the bone, while possessing excellent durability ensuring long-term stability in-vivo [ 1 , 4 – 6 , 10 ]. Furthermore, although PEEK is a challenging material for additive manufacturing due to its high melting temperature, successful 3D printing of PEEK enables patient-specific geometries tailored to complex defect while maintaining superior mechanical integrity [ 1 , 4 , 6 ]. By precisely controlling pore architecture including porosity, pore size and interconnectivity, mechanical integrity and biological fixation can be optimized, facilitating tissue ingrowth for excellent load-bearing performance [ 4 , 11 , 12 ]. However, PEEK is a representative bioinert material with limited capacity to facilitate cellular adhesion and proliferation. The deficiency in surface bioactivity results in lack of osseointegration and osteogenesis, compromising initial stability of the bone implant and delaying tissue regeneration [ 1 , 4 – 6 , 11 ]. Consequently, strategies for surface functionalization to enhance bioactivity is essential for maximizing the clinical performance of PEEK-based orthopedic implants. Molybdenum disulfide (MoS₂), a transition metal dichalcogenides (TMDCs), is gaining attention as a functional material in the biomedical field due to its high surface area, defect rich surfaces including sulfur vacancies and edge sites with oxygen containing surface species such as MoOx and Mo-OH which can collectively enhance biocompatibility, with cellular adhesion, proliferation and differentiation [ 13 – 20 ]. In addition, MoS₂ exhibits excellent long term mechanical and chemical stability, making it an ideal candidate for biomedical implant surface functionalization [ 1 , 17 , 19 , 20 ]. Notably, MoS₂ exhibits dual phototherapeutic performance, inducing both photothermal therapy (PTT) and photodynamic therapy (PDT) effects in response to external light irradiation [ 2 , 5 , 13 , 19 ]. Compared to conventional pharmacological interventions, this light-mediated approach offers a non-invasive, localized antimicrobial and anticancer treatment, which can minimize damage to healthy tissue and systemic side effects while accelerating tissue regeneration [ 1 , 5 , 10 , 11 , 19 ]. PTT can selectively damage tumor cells and bacteria by localized hyperthermia through photothermal conversion under near-infrared irradiation (NIR) [ 1 , 2 , 5 , 13 , 19 ]. PDT generates reactive oxygen species (ROS) upon light irradiation, thereby inducing cytotoxicity and antibacterial performances [ 5 , 13 , 19 ]. However, the therapeutic efficacy of PTT or PDT monotherapy may be limited. Therefore, synergizing these two phototherapies can significantly enhance therapeutic efficacy and address heterogeneity within tumor and infection microenvironments [ 2 , 5 , 13 , 19 ]. Furthermore, numerous studies have reported that mild photothermal stimulation promotes not only osteogenesis but also accelerate angiogenesis [ 5 , 10 , 11 , 15 , 18 ]. Consequently, precisely controlled photo-stimulation represents a potent strategy to achieve tumor ablation and infection prophylaxis, while simultaneously promoting vascularized bone regeneration. MoS 2 can be synthesized by mechanical exfoliation, chemical exfoliation, hydrothermal/solvothermal synthesis, metal organic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD), and atmospheric pressure chemical vapor deposition (APCVD) [ 13 , 16 , 19 – 21 ]. However, these methods often struggle to obtain highly crystalline MoS 2 , require prolonged synthesis time, require high costs, pose health, and environmental risks. Notably, these methods have limitations in precisely controlling the layer thickness and uniformity [ 13 , 14 , 16 , 20 , 21 ]. To overcome these limitations, we utilized the nanoseed-initiated APCVD process, which enables wafer-scale synthesis of 2D monolayer MoS 2 with reducing potential health and environment risks, with high crystallinity and uniformity over a wide area in a relatively short time, offering excellent reproducibility and scalability. Furthermore, by applying a polymer-assisted transfer method, MoS 2 can be conformally integrated onto the large surface area of the substrate with complex morphologies. This approach enables functionalization of heat-sensitive polymers such as PEEK which cannot withstand high temperature of CVD or hydrothermal process for direct MoS₂ growth, and additionally allows integration onto the irregular surface of 3D scaffolds, thereby significantly enhancing the bioactivity of 3D-printed PEEK. In this study, we applied MoO 2 nanoseed-initiated APCVD to uniformly synthesize a wafer-scale 2D monolayer MoS 2 with high crystallinity, which subsequently integrated onto the surface of 3D-printed PEEK by a polymer assisted transfer technique. This process developed 3D-printed PEEK functionalized with 2D MoS₂ termed as MoS 2 @PEEK. MoS 2 @PEEK features a structure optimized for the patient specific defects, and enhanced osteogenesis and angiogenesis. Moreover, MoS 2 @PEEK exhibits dual phototherapeutic efficacy under dual-wavelength irradiation at 808 and 650 nm, which induces PTT and PDT responses, respectively. This synergistic approach significantly mitigates the risk of postoperative bacterial infection and tumor recurrence while simultaneously accelerating osteogenesis and angiogenesis through a pro-regenerative microenvironment (Scheme 1 ) [ 22 ]. Consequently, by integrating patient specific bone reconstruction and localized dual phototherapy into a single implant, this platform represents a next-generation theragenerative strategy to overcome critical challenges that may arise during implant placement and tissue reconstruction following osteosarcoma resection. 2. Materials and methods 2.1. Materials Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) granule, 6 mm nominal granule size, weight 200 g, PEEK powder, mean particle size 50 µm, weight 100 g, ammonium heptamolybdate powder, ethyl alcohol (EtOH, 99%), acetone (99%), isopropyl alcohol (IPA, 99%), polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP, molecular weight: 40,000), NaCl powder (99%), SiC sandpapers, polystyrene (PS, molecular weight: 280,000), toluene (99.8%), antibiotic–antimycotic (AA), paraformaldehyde (4%), Triton X-100, bovine serum albumin (BSA), glutaraldehyde, 1,1,1,3,3,3-hexamethyldisilazane, trypsin EDTA solution, and alizarin red S (ARS), sodium phosphate, cetylpyridinium chloride, p-Nitrophenyl Phosphate (pNPP) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (USA). Sapphire wafer was obtained from 4science (Korea). Argon gas (99.999%, Ar), and Nitrogen gas (99.99%, N 2 ) were purchased from DAEHAN SPECIAL GAS Co., LTD (Korea). 70% EtOH, and methyl alcohol were purchased from DAEJUNG (Korea). Endothelial cell basal medium-2 (EBM) and endothelial cell growth kit (EGM) were obtained from Lonza (Switzerland). Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium (DMEM), Dulbecco's Phosphate-Buffered Saline (DPBS), and alpha minimum essential medium (α-MEM) were purchased from Welgene (Korea). Fetal bovine serum (FBS) was obtained from Gibco (USA). Singlet oxygen sensor green (SOSG) kit, Live/Dead staining kit (L3224), 4′,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI), CyQUANT cell proliferation assay kit (C7026), calcein AM, and live and dead bacterial viability kit (L7012) were obtained from Invitrogen (USA). CCK cell viability assay kit (D-Plus) was purchased from Dongin-LS (Korea). Alexa Fluor® 555 phalloidin was purchased from Molecular Probes (USA). BCA protein assay kit was obtained from Thermo Fisher (USA). 2.2. Fabrication of the PEEK filament and 3D-Printed PEEK scaffolds For the manufacture of PEEK filament, PEEK was mixed in two forms-granules and powder-at a ratio of 80 vol% granules to 20 vol% powder by volume. This composition was designed to maintain the stable melt viscosity of the granule base while allowing the powder to effectively fill the voids between the granules, thereby improving flowability and enhancing extrusion stability. Subsequently, all mixed raw materials were dried in a vacuum oven at 80°C for 12 h to remove moisture. The dried mixture was extruded at 400°C using filament manufacturing equipment (3devo B.V., Netherlands), resulting in the production of uniform filaments with a diameter of 1.56 ± 0.01 mm. The manufactured filament was used for 3D printing via a customized FDM system. Printing was performed under the following conditions: nozzle temperature 440°C, bed temperature 160°C, chamber temperature 160°C, printing speed 20 mm/s, and layer thickness 200 µm. Under these conditions, various structural bodies were printed to realize patient-specific shapes based on diverse CAD designs. 2.3. Preparation of MoO 2 Precursor Solution MoO 2 nanoparticle was synthesized by hydrothermal synthesis. 150 mg of Ammonium heptamolybdate powder was dissolved in 22 mL of deionized (DI) wafer. And 10 mL of EtOH was added to the solution. After 500 mg of PVP powder was dissolved in the solution. Subsequently mixture was stirred for 30 min. The solution was transferred into Teflon-lined stainless-steel autoclave (SCIST, Korea) and heat-treated at 180 ℃ for 16 h in a muffle furnace. After the reaction, autoclave was rapidly cooled in 4 ℃ water. The solution was then centrifuged by 23,000 G, and supernatant was removed. The precipitate was washed three times with acetone and EtOH, respectively, followed by drying at 80 ℃ overnight to prepare MoO 2 nanoparticle. To prepare MoO 2 precursor solution, 15.2 mg of MoO 2 nanoparticle precursor was dispersed in 30 mL of ethanol with uniform dispersion by sonication for 30 min. Then, 1.2 mL of MoO 2 solution was mixed with 0.1 mL of ethanol and 26 µL of 0.1 M NaCl in methanol, followed by sonication for 10 min. 2.4. 2D MoS 2 Synthesis via Nanoseed-Initiated APCVD Sapphire wafer was pretreated at 1000 ℃ for 4 h in a muffle furnace to remove surface impurities. The pretreated wafer was sequentially washed by sonication in acetone and EtOH for 10 min each, respectively. Afterwards, wafer was rinsed with IPA and dried by N 2 gas blowing. After cleaning process, 0.8 mL of MoO 2 precursor solution was drop-cast on the wafer and uniformly dispersed by spin coating at 3,000 rpm for 60 s. The MoO 2 dispersed wafer and sulfur powder were loaded in separate zones within CVD chamber. Distance between the samples was 35 cm. The MoO 2 dispersed wafer was heated to 650 ℃ for 45 min and maintained at that temperature for 30 min, and sulfur powder was maintained at 20 ℃ for 35 min, then heated to 140 ℃ for 10 min and held at that temperature for 30 min, respectively, under Ar atmosphere with flow rate of 500 sccm. After the heating process, the samples were cooled to room temperature. 2.5. Polymer Assisted Transfer of MoS 2 onto 3D-Printed PEEK Scaffolds The PEEK was polished in sequence with 800, 1,000, 2,000, 3,000 grits SiC sandpaper. Polished PEEK was washed sequentially by ethanol and DI water with sonication for 5 min each. A polymer assisted transfer method was used to transfer MoS 2 onto PEEK surface. For the supporting polymer, 9 g of PS powder was dissolved in 100 mL of toluene overnight. The PS solution was spin coated onto MoS 2 deposited wafer at 3,000 rpm for 60 s and subsequently heat-treated at 90 ℃ for 5 min on a hot plate to completely dry the solvent. The PS coated MoS 2 wafer was cut into size of the PEEK substrate and immersed in DI water. Due to the hydrophobic nature of both MoS₂ and PS, water penetrates the interface between MoS 2 and the wafer, separating the PS/MoS 2 layer from the wafer and floating on the water surface. The floating film was carefully transferred onto PEEK substrate. Then residual water between MoS 2 and PEEK was removed using filter paper and to ensure complete removal of the water, the sample was heat-treated at 90 ℃ for 5 min. The PS was eliminated by immersing the sample in toluene for 1 h and the sample was rinsed with acetone and dried at room temperature for 30 min. The resulting MoS₂ transferred PEEK substrate is hereafter referred to as MoS 2 @PEEK. 2.6. Characterization of MoS 2 grown wafer and MoS 2 @PEEK. The morphology, nanostructure and atomic structure of the materials were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM, HITACHI S-4800, Japan) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM, JEOL Ltd, JEM-2100F, Japan), equipped with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX). To investigate the cross-sectional morphology, a TEM specimen was prepared by focused ion beam milling (FIB) using a dual-beam SEM (ZEISS AURIGA, Germany), followed by TEM imaging. The surface chemistry of products was collected by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS, AXIS SUPRA, ESCA II, UK). X-ray diffraction (XRD, Rigaku MiniFlex600, Japan) patterns were recorded, diffractometer using Cu Kα radiation (λ = 1.5405 Å) with the 2θ range of 20–75° with an interval of 0.02°. Additionally, Raman spectra were collected using aberration-corrected spectrometer operated with 532 nm laser (NOST, HEDA, Korea). 2.7. The Photothermal and Photodynamic Ability of the MoS 2 @PEEK scaffold The photothermal and photodynamic characteristics of the scaffold were assessed utilizing 808 nm and 650 nm NIR lasers (OCLA; AMI, Korea), respectively. The 3D-printed scaffold, with dimensions of 10 × 10 × 2 mm³, was positioned within a mold filled with DPBS, measuring 20 × 20 × 4 mm³, to replicate an in vitro environment. Photothermal properties were evaluated by monitoring temperature variations over time under irradiation at power intensities of 1, 2, and 3 W cm⁻² using the 808 nm laser. Photodynamic properties were examined by assessing the time-dependent production of singlet oxygen ( 1 O₂) under continuous irradiation with a 650 nm laser (100 mW). During irradiation, temperature changes were recorded in real-time using a thermal imaging camera (FLIR E54; FLIR Systems Inc., USA), and 1 O₂ generation was quantified employing the SOSG assay. SOSG fluorescence was measured with a hybrid multi-mode reader (Synergy H1, BioTek, USA) at an excitation wavelength of 390 nm and an emission wavelength of 520 nm. The final fluorescence values were obtained by subtracting the signal of the control group and subsequently normalizing the data for analysis. 2.8. In vitro Dual-Phototherapeutic Anticancer Performance of MoS₂@PEEK scaffolds Osteosarcoma cells (MG63; CRL-1427, ATCC, USA) were seeded onto sterilized PEEK and MoS₂@PEEK scaffolds (10 × 10 × 2 mm³) at a density of 2 × 10⁴ cells mL⁻¹ following treatment with 70% ethanol and ultraviolet (UV) irradiation. The cells were subsequently cultured under standard conditions in DMEM supplemented with 10% FBS and 1% AA. After a 24 h incubation period to facilitate cell attachment and stabilization, NIR irradiation was conducted. Specifically, a 650 nm laser was applied at 100 mW output for 3 min, followed by an 808 nm laser at an output density of 2 W cm⁻² for 3 min. Cell viability was then qualitatively assessed using fluorescent staining with a Live/Dead staining kit and quantitatively analyzed using a CCK-8 assay. Fluorescence images were acquired using a fluorescence microscope (ECLIPS Ti2; Nikon, Japan). Cells were stained to indicate live and dead states with Calcein AM and Ethidium homodimer-1, respectively. 2.9. In vitro Dual-Phototherapeutic Antibacterial Effect of MoS₂@PEEK scaffolds Gram-negative Escherichia coli ( E. coli ; ATCC 8739, Rockville, MD, USA) and gram-positive Staphylococcus aureus ( S. aureus ; ATCC 6538, Rockville, MD, USA) were employed to assess the NIR-responsive dual phototherapeutic antibacterial efficacy of the theragenerative MoS₂@PEEK platform. Each bacterial strain was cultured for 24 h by inoculating 50 µL of stock solution into 3 mL of LB broth. Subsequently, scaffolds measuring 10 × 10 × 2 mm 3 , sterilized with 70% ethanol and UV irradiation, were placed in a 24-well plate. Suspensions of E. coli (1 × 10³ CFU mL⁻¹) and S. aureus (1 × 10⁴ CFU mL⁻¹), each 60 µL, were seeded onto the respective specimens. Following a 4 h incubation period to facilitate bacterial attachment, NIR laser irradiation was conducted. PDT was executed using a 650 nm laser at 100 mW for 3 minutes, while photothermal therapy PTT was performed using an 808 nm laser at 2 W cm⁻² for 3 minutes. Immediately post-NIR irradiation, the specimens were washed twice with DPBS and fixed with 2.5% glutaraldehyde to observe bacterial morphological changes. A stepwise dehydration process was then conducted using 70%, 90%, and 100% ethanol, followed by treatment with 1,1,1,3,3,3-hexamethyldisilazane, and analysis was performed using FE-SEM. Bacterial viability was assessed using a live/dead bacterial viability kit, with SYTO 9 and propidium iodide applied to each specimen and allowed to react for 15 min in the dark condition, followed by qualitative analysis using a fluorescence microscope. For quantitative evaluation, post-laser irradiation, the specimens were further incubated for 6 hours at 37°C and 150 rpm. The specimens were then washed with PBS, transferred into 3 mL of LB broth, and the attached bacteria were detached by vigorous vortexing for 1 min. The recovered bacterial suspension was serially diluted tenfold up to 10 3 times and subsequently plated onto LB agar plates. After 24 h of incubation at 37°C, the number of colonies formed was counted, and the average number of colonies was quantified based on high-resolution images. 2.10. In vitro NIR-Responsive Osteo- Angiogenesis of MoS₂@PEEK scaffolds The degree of osteogenesis and angiogenesis were analyzed using pre-osteoblast cells (MC3T3-E1; CRL-2593, ATCC, USA), and human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs; CRL-1730, ATCC, USA), respectibely. MC3T3-E1 cells and HUVECs were cultured in α-MEM, and EBM supplemented with EGM bullet kit, respectively. To observe the cell adhesion behavior in response to the activated surface characteristics of MoS₂ and NIR stimuli, fluorescence images were obtained via fluorescence microscopy, and additional analyses were conducted using FE-SEM. For fluorescence staining, cells were seeded on specimens (10 × 10 × 2 mm³) at a density of 3 × 10⁴ cells mL⁻¹, fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde, and immersed in 0.1% Triton X-100 and 3% BSA solutions. The nuclei and cytoplasm of the cells were then stained with DAPI and phalloidin, respectively. For quantitative analysis of cell adhesion, cell density based on fluorescence images and cytoplasmic area per cell based on FE-SEM images were each analyzed. Cell proliferation was assessed using the CCK-8 assay; after seeding at a density of 2 × 10⁴ cells mL⁻¹ and allowing an overnight stabilization period, absorbance at 450 nm was measured using a multi-mode reader at 1 and 3 days. Cell differentiation was analyzed through ARS staining and ALP activity assay. For ARS staining, the specimens were washed twice with DPBS, fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde, and reacted with ARS solution under dark conditions, followed by washing with DW and drying. The degree of mineralization was then photographed using a high-resolution camera. For quantitative analysis, the specimens washed with DW were reacted with 10% cetylpyridinium chloride in 10 mM sodium phosphate (pH 7.0), and absorbance at 560 nm was measured using a multi-mode reader. For the ALP activity assay, cells were collected by trypsin EDTA treatment, then treated with 0.1% Triton X-100 and vortexed, followed by four cycles of freezing at -70°C and thawing at 37°C for 5 minutes each. The samples were then centrifuged at 14,000 rpm and 4°C for 20 minutes to separate the supernatant, and samples were prepared according to consistent protein amounts determined by BCA protein quantification. Next, pNPP was dispensed, reacted at 37°C for 1 hour, and absorbance at 405 nm was measured using a multi-mode reader. 2.11. Statistical Analysis The quantitative experimental results are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation, derived from at least three replicates for each group. The data analysis was conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics 26 (IBM, Armonk, USA). To determine statistical significance, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Tukey’s post hoc test, the Kruskal–Wallis H test, and the Mann-Whitney U test with pairwise comparisons were employed. The p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant, with significance levels indicated as follows: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.005, and ****p < 0.001. 3. Results and Discussion 3.1. Fabrication of 3D-printed PEEK Scaffold Recently, polyetheretherketone (PEEK)-based scaffolds have emerged as promising biomaterials in the field of orthopedics, owing to their bone-mimetic mechanical properties and exceptional in vivo stability arising from their inherent chemical inertness [ 23 – 25 ]. Nevertheless, conventional PEEK scaffolds have a limitation of failing to adequately meet complex biological requirements such as suppressing cancer recurrence, managing perioperative bacterial infections, and accelerating vascularization and bone regeneration [ 26 , 27 ]. These biological limitations not only reduce the efficiency of tissue reconstruction but also increase the risk of long-term complications, potentially leading to permanent functional impairment [ 28 ]. Specifically, for extensive and irregular defects formed after osteosarcoma resection, technical limitations exist in fabricating structures of the implant that simultaneously satisfy anatomical precision and mechanical compatibility. Therefore, PEEK scaffolds fabricated through 3D printing-based patient-specific structure must not only ensure precise geometric compatibility with the surrounding tissue but also be extended to simultaneously facilitate therapeutic treatment and tissue regeneration through integration with functional materials [ 29 , 30 ]. Accordingly, this study proposes a strategy to enhance tissue-material interfacial interactions and induce functional reconstruction by integrating monolayer molybdenum disulfide (MoS 2 ) synthesized via MoO 2 nanoseed-initiated atmospheric pressure chemical vapor deposition (APCVD), onto the surface of a 3D-printed PEEK scaffold. Notably, by exploiting the photo-responsivity of 2D MoS 2 , we induced localized dual-phototherapeutic effects of combined photothermal (PTT) and photodynamic therapies (PDT), while simultaneously promoting tissue regeneration through the intrinsic bioactivity of MoS 2 . Consequently, a 2D MoS 2 -conformal 3D-printed PEEK based theragenerative platform was established, enabling simultaneous eradication of residual cancer cells and bacterial pathogens with accelerated vascularized osteogenesis, as illustrated in Scheme 1 . First, to achieve precise 3D-printed PEEK scaffolds, it is essential to manufacture PEEK filaments with uniform diameters and stable physical properties. However, melt-extruding PEEK into high quality filaments while preserving its inherent mechanical properties remains as a technically challenging task [ 31 ]. To ensure the structural stability and printing precision of PEEK filaments, we employed a granule-powder blend of granules with a nominal size of 6 mm and powder with an average size of 50 µm at an 8:2 (vol%) ratio. While granules offer the advantage of excellent mechanical strength, their high strength and melting characteristics can hinder flowability during filament extrusion. In contrast, powder effectively fills interparticle voids, thereby enhancing flowability and ensuring extrusion stability. Utilizing this optimized blend, we successfully produced highly uniform filaments with a diameter of 1.56 ± 0.01 mm by melt extrusion-based compression molding process. By applying the filaments, various structures were fabricated based on computer-aided design (CAD) models under printing conditions of 440°C ( Fig. S1 ). Furthermore, to demonstrate the anatomical applicability and clinical scalability, several orthopedic devices traditionally made from metallic alloys including cranial patch, spinal cage, suture anchor, and bone plate, were 3D-printed with high anatomical precision, confirming the feasibility of patient-specific fabrication and its applicability to actual bone defect sites ( Fig. S2 ). 3.2. Fabrication and Characterization of MoS 2 @PEEK scaffold MoS₂, a member of the transition metal dichalcogenide (TMDC) family, has attracted considerable attention as a functional material for biomedical application owing to its high specific surface area, and superior interfacial reactivity arising from sulfur vacancies, edge defects, and surface-active species such as MoOₓ and Mo–OH, which collectively contribute to its excellent cellular compatibility and adhesive properties [ 12 , 14 , 15 , 17 ]. Furthermore, MoS₂ maintains excellent mechanical and chemical stability over prolonged periods while offering great potential as a next-generation biointerfacial material owing to its photo-responsive capabilities such as PTT and PDT [ 13 , 16 , 17 , 19 , 20 , 32 ]. However, to translate these advantages into practical biomedical platforms, highly crystalline 2D MoS₂ with precisely controlled layer thickness over large-area substrates, must be reproducibly synthesized. In parallel, processing strategies are required to enable damage-free integration of MoS 2 onto various substrates, particularly 3D scaffolds with complex geometries. To achieve large-area, highly crystalline 2D MoS₂, we employed a MoO 2 nanoseed-initiated APCVD process. The as-synthesized 2D MoS 2 was integrated onto 3D printed PEEK via polymer assisted transfer to yield the MoS 2 @PEEK platform ( Fig. S3). Based on previous study, the MoO 2 precursor was synthesized via a hydrothermal method [ 21 ]. The crystallographic structure of the synthesized MoO 2 precursor were validated by x-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis. The XRD patterns exhibited the characteristic peaks corresponding to the (100), (002), and (101) planes of MoO 2 , confirming the successful synthesis of the highly crystalline MoO 2 precursor ( Fig. S4 ). The synthesis of highly crystalline nanoparticle precursor is a critical foundation for achieving highly crystalline MoS 2 during the subsequent nanoseed-initiated APCVD process. This is because the highly crystalline MoO 2 nanoparticles act as self-seeding templates, where the growth of the MoS 2 layer is driven by strong crystallographic correlations and energetically preferred orientations, rather than simply replicating the crystal structure of MoO 2 [ 20 , 21 ]. The synthesized MoO 2 precursor was mixed with ethanol, methanol, and NaCl to prepare a MoO 2 solution, which was uniformly dispersed onto the wafer by spin-coating. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) and energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDX) analyses were performed to examine whether the MoO 2 particles were uniformly distributed on the prepared sapphire wafer ( Fig. S5 ). The results showed that the MoO 2 particles were uniformly distributed across wafer surface, suggesting the spatial homogeneity which is a critical factor in achieving uniform sulfurization and preventing non-uniform island coalescence or unnecessary local defects during nanoseed-initiated APCVD process [ 13 , 16 , 20 , 21 ]. Subsequently, sulfur powder was used as the sulfur source and MoS 2 grown wafer was fabricated by nanoseed-initiated APCVD. As shown in Fig. S6 , Optical images and Optical Microscopy (OM) analyses confirmed that MoS 2 was uniformly grown across the entire large-area wafer (diameter of 2 inches). Such large-scale uniformity sample to sample variation, enhancing the reliability of subsequent biological evaluations [ 14 , 21 , 33 – 35 ]. SEM and EDX analyses further confirmed that the MoS 2 was uniformly grown across the entire wafer ( Fig. S7 ). This indicates that sulfurization did not occur locally but proceeded uniformly across the entire wafer surface, thereby supporting the chemical homogeneity and reproducibility of the process. Transmission Electron Microscope (TEM) analysis revealed that the synthesized MoS 2 grew in the morphology of triangular island ( Fig. S8a ), indicating a highly ordered crystalline structure rather than an amorphous phase [ 20 , 21 ]. Notably, cross-sectional TEM analysis confirmed that the thickness of the synthesized MoS 2 was approximately 6 Å, directly demonstrating the growth of monolayer MoS 2 ( Fig. S8b and c ) [ 15 , 16 , 21 ]. The significance of the monolayer structure extends beyond its minimal thickness, it maximizes interfacial interactions with the substrate, exposes active surface sites to the external environment, and gives rise to properties that are distinct from those of bulk or few layer counterparts [ 13 , 14 , 18 – 20 , 32 ]. Therefore, the monolayer and highly crystalline structures obtained in this study can be regarded as a key structural foundation for subsequent cell-material interactions, modulation of surface energy, and the photo-responsive functions. Raman analysis further supported these findings, showing characteristic Raman peaks of the MoS 2 at 386 and 403 cm⁻¹. The 17 cm⁻¹ peak separation confirms the formation of monolayer structure of MoS 2 ( Fig. S9a ) [ 12 , 21 ]. Furthermore, Mo and S peaks were observed in the full XPS spectra of the MoS 2 grown wafer ( Fig. S9b ), and Mo 3d5, Mo 3d3, S 2p3, and S 2p1 peaks were clearly identified in the high-resolution XPS spectra ( Fig. S9c and d ), indicating that the chemically stable 2D MoS 2 phase was successfully synthesized without any physically adsorbed byproducts. Consequently, the nanoseed initiated APCVD process developed in this study can be an effective synthesis strategy to produce highly crystalline 2D monolayer MoS 2 with uniform thickness on a large area. Subsequently, the 2D monolayer MoS 2 was transferred onto the 3D-printed PEEK using a polymer assisted transfer process, followed by the removal of polystyrene (PS) with toluene to obtain the MoS 2 @PEEK scaffold. This process offers the advantage of preserving the high crystalline monolayer characteristics achieved during the synthesis without structural damage, while ultimately enabling functional integration onto the surface of a biomedical scaffold. This demonstrates a higher level of technical completeness than conventional transfer methods such as wet transfer, electrochemical delamination, bubble transfer, and dry transfer [ 21 , 35 ]. The surface characteristics including surface morphology, chemical structure of the fabricated MoS 2 @PEEK were evaluated. Optical images, SEM, and EDX analyses confirmed that MoS 2 was uniformly transferred over a wide area of the 3D-printed PEEK surface (Fig. 1 a). This indicates that the transfer was achieved stably across the entire surface of the scaffold, rather than being confined to specific regions. In particular, 3D printed scaffolds may exhibit surface roughness, curvature, and microstructural inhomogeneities, uniform transfer on complex structure is particularly noteworthy from a process engineering perspective. Cross-sectional TEM analysis confirmed that the monolayer MoS 2 with a thickness of approximately 6 Å was functionalized on the 3D-printed PEEK surface (Fig. 1 b and c) , consistent with cross-sectional TEM image observed for the MoS 2 grown wafer ( Fig.S8b and c ). This demonstrates that the transfer process 2D MoS₂was transferred onto the substrate while preserving the monolayer characteristics and structural integrity established during the synthesis. Raman analysis revealed the characteristic peaks of monolayer MoS 2 at 384 and 403 cm − 1 on the MoS 2 @PEEK surface, and the 19 cm − 1 separation between the two peaks which suit the separation range of 17–19 cm − 1 of the monolayer MoS 2 confirming the successful transfer of monolayer MoS 2 (Fig. 1 d). Furthermore, the uniformity of the transferred 2D MoS 2 , Raman evaluation was performed at predetermined nine spots of MoS 2 @PEEK surface, and the characteristic peaks of monolayer MoS₂ were consistently observed in all regions ( Fig. S10 ). The XPS analysis results also strongly supported this finding. Mo and S peaks, which were not observed in PEEK, were clearly identified in the full XPS spectra of MoS₂@PEEK (Fig. 1 e), and the high resolution XPS spectra revealed Mo 3d5, Mo 3d3, S 2p3, and S 2p1 peaks identical to those of the MoS₂ coated wafer (Fig. 1 f and g ). These results demonstrate that this transfer process is not limited to localized functionalization but can achieve a stable and reproducible uniform monolayer coating across the entire surface of the scaffold. This provides an important foundation for minimizing surface location dependent variations in cellular responses and ensuring uniform biological performance in future bio-scaffold applications. The integrated process of nanoseed-initiated APCVD growth, and polymer assisted transfer can be regarded as a coherent fabrication strategy for integrating highly crystalline 2D monolayer MoS 2 onto the surface of a 3D polymer scaffold without structural damage. This level of process integration is particularly attractive because it demonstrates technical completeness that extends beyond simple material fabrication and is directly applicable to the design of tissue engineering scaffolds and next generation biointerfaces, representing a key methodology distinction of this study. Hydrophilicity of the surface was evaluated by measuring water contact angles of PEEK and MoS₂@PEEK showed that the contact angle of MoS₂@PEEK was higher than that of the PEEK ( Fig. S11 ), showing that the introduction of MoS₂ increased surface hydrophobicity. Although hydrophobicity was increased which may be considered as adverse effect on cellular adhesion, despite its higher hydrophobicity MoS₂@PEEK exhibited enhanced cellular compatibility. This suggests that cell-material interactions are not determined solely by contact angle but rather arise from the combined effects of surface chemical composition, defect structures, charge distribution, interfacial reactivity, protein adsorption behavior, and nanoscale surface characteristics [ 15 , 17 , 18 , 32 – 34 ]. In particular, the high specific surface area and exposed active sites of the monolayer MoS₂, together with sulfur vacancies, edge defects, and surface MoOₓ/Mo–OH species, may have favorably modulated the interfacial interactions associated with initial protein adsorption and cell adhesion [ 13 , 15 , 17 – 20 , 32 ]. In other words, the enhanced cytocompatibility observed in this study is more reasonably attributed to the biologically activated interface provided by the highly crystalline monolayer MoS₂, rather than being explained by the conventional interpretation that it simply depends on increased surface hydrophilicity. Furthermore, the monolayer MoS₂ synthesized in this study exhibits high crystallinity while retaining active surface sites, demonstrating the feasibility of designing surfaces that simultaneously satisfy structural stability and biological reactivity. This may provide a favorable foundation for broader biomedical application in the future, including photostimulation-based functionalization, regulation of cellular behavior, and induction of tissue regeneration. 3.3. Photo-stimulated Photothermal and Photodynamic Performance of MoS 2 @PEEK Scaffolds Photoresponsiveness acts as a precision control system based on external stimuli. It is a key characteristic that allows stimuli to be transmitted non-invasively into the tissues, enabling selective activation of treatment at specific sites and inducing functional expression only when necessary. This serves as a significant advantage over conventional drug-based therapies by minimizing off-target effects [ 36 , 37 ]. With the successful incorporation of 2D MoS 2 onto the surface, the limitations of the biological functionality inherent in conventional PEEK scaffolds are effectively overcome. The introduction of a photoresponsive interface enables a transition from a simple scaffold to an active platform for promoting both therapy and regeneration. Therefore, the photoresponsiveness depending on the photo wavelength was systematically evaluated. Monolayer MoS 2 possesses a direct bandgap (~ 1.8–1.9 eV), which induces both efficient charge generation and surface reactions upon light irradiation. These electronic structural characteristics and high surface exposure provide the foundation for implementing PTT and PDT within a single platform [ 38 , 39 ]. When NIR irradiation at the 808 nm is applied, the electron energy is converted into lattice vibrations (phonons) rather than being emitted as light. The accumulation of these phonons leads to localized heat generation, resulting in a photothermal effect where light energy is converted into thermal energy [ 40 , 41 ]. In particular, the monolayer MoS 2 structure induces a stable temperature rise due to the rapid transfer and diffusion of heat generated through its high surface-to-volume ratio and direct interfacial contact with the PEEK substrate [ 42 , 43 ]. In contrast, under light irradiation conditions in the 650 nm region (≈ 1.91 eV), generated charges migrate to the surface before recombination, triggering oxidation-reduction reactions with surrounding oxygen and water molecules, which leads to the formation of reactive oxygen species (ROS). Since monolayer MoS 2 has a structure in which all atoms are exposed at the surface, the number of reactive sites is maximized, and the density of edge sites and defects promotes charge transfer reactions. Furthermore, the short charge transport distance increases the probability of participation in surface reactions before recombination, thereby enhancing ROS generation efficiency [ 44 , 45 ]. Under dual-wavelength irradiation at 808 nm and 650 nm, photothermal and photodynamic effects act complementarily, resulting in a synergistic therapeutic outcome. Consequently, wavelength-selective photoresponsiveness enables a precisely controllable combined therapeutic strategy even on a single-material basis, thereby directly enabling spatiotemporally controlled therapeutic functionality, providing the core principle by which the MoS 2 @PEEK scaffold functions as a light-induced theragenerative platform [ 46 – 50 ]. Accordingly, quantitative validation of the degree of photoresponsiveness and the irradiation intensity and duration conditions was performed. To precisely control the photothermal effect, temperature changes were analyzed as a function of the irradiation intensity and duration of 808 nm NIR, and heat generation was evaluated while immersed in DPBS to simulate a tissue-like environment. As a result, temperature elevation was observed in both the 3D-printed PEEK and the MoS 2 @PEEK scaffolds, increasing regarding to NIR irradiation intensity and exposure time. However, while PEEK exhibited only a limited temperature rise even under 3 W/cm² conditions, MoS 2 @PEEK showed a much higher photothermal conversion efficiency with increasing irradiation intensity and duration (Fig. 2 a and 2 b). Quantitative analysis revealed that a rapid temperature rise occurred within approximately 30 sec after NIR irradiation, followed by a gradual stabilization. Based on the maximum temperature after 3 min of irradiation, the temperature difference 0.76°C at 1 W/cm² (PEEK: 25.65°C, MoS 2 @PEEK: 26.41°C), 7.32°C at 2 W/cm² (PEEK 29.49°C, MoS 2 @PEEK 36.81°C), and 11.23°C at 3 W/cm² (PEEK 37.08°C, MoS 2 @PEEK 48.31°C) (Fig. 2 c and 2 d). These results are attributed to the fact that PEEK, as a polymer which lacks photoactive functional groups, has a very low light absorption coefficient. Thus, the incident light energy is not effectively converted into heat but is largely dissipated without significant thermal conversion. In contrast, in MoS 2 @PEEK, heat is continuously generated due to the repeated creation of photoexcited charges and phonon accumulation resulting from non-radiative recombination. Furthermore, the temperature rise was more pronounced because the heat generation rate remained higher than the heat loss rate during continuous light irradiation [ 51 , 52 ]. To verify the reproducibility of the photothermal effect, the on-off cycle was repeated three times under 808 nm irradiation conditions. As a result, a reproducible and significant photothermal effect was confirmed in MoS 2 @PEEK. Notably, under the 3 W/cm² condition, complete cooling did not occur during the off interval due to excessive heat generation. Consequently, as the cycles were repeated, the degree of temperature rise tended to increase progressively due to the accumulated heat relative to the initial temperature (Fig. 2 e). Furthermore, when irradiated at 3 W/cm² starting from an initial temperature of 25°C, the temperature of MoS 2 @PEEK rose to 48.31°C, representing an increase of approximately 23.31°C, which is a level capable of causing thermal damage to surrounding normal tissue. Therefore, an irradiation intensity of 2 W/cm², which induces a temperature rise of approximately 11.81°C, was established as the optimal condition for theragenerative application [ 53 ]. Subsequently, SOSG fluorescence analysis was performed to verify the potential for photodynamic therapy in the 650 nm wavelength range. The results showed that ROS was not generated generation was observed in PEEK, whereas a time-dependent increase in ROS generation was confirmed in MoS 2 @PEEK (Fig. 2 f). This indicates that photodynamic therapy can be applied by controlling the irradiation time. Furthermore, to verify wavelength-dependent photoresponsiveness, temperature changes under 650 nm irradiation conditions were analyzed under 100 mW, 3 min irradiation conditions, and photothermal effect was occurred in either PEEK or MoS 2 @PEEK (Fig. S12 ). Conversely, SOSG fluorescence analysis under 808 nm irradiation conditions revealed no ROS generation in either group ( Fig. S13 ). In the 650 nm region, exciton-driven charge generation promotes surface redox reactions, whereas heat accumulation via non-radiative recombination remains limited. In contrast, in the 808 nm region, sub-bandgap excitation leads to rapid non-radiative recombination, resulting in efficient heat generation but insufficient charge transfer for ROS production. Consequently, this wavelength-selective photoresponsiveness clearly demonstrates that the MoS 2 @PEEK system can precisely control the therapeutic mode depending on external light stimulation conditions, providing a key basis for the design of a theragenerative platform capable of applying PTT and PDT both independently and in combination [ 16 , 54 ]. 3.4 In vitro Synergistic Dual-Phototherapeutic Antitumor Performance of MoS 2 @PEEK Scaffold Following osteosarcoma resection, there is a significant risk of recurrence due to residual cancer cells at the surgical site. In particular, residual cancer cells can lead to tumor recurrence by continuously proliferating and invading surrounding tissues and metastasizing, which is a major cause requiring additional surgical resection and anticancer therapy. Therefore, effective elimination of residual cancer cells is critical for preventing recurrence and improving therapeutic outcomes [ 55 , 56 ]. To address these issues, we introduced a treatment strategy utilizing external light stimulation based on the photoresponsive properties of 2D MoS 2 . Specifically, we aimed to evaluate the synergistic therapeutic effects by applying PTT and PDT independently, as well as in combination as dual-phototherapy. Osteosarcoma cells were seeded onto PEEK and MoS₂@PEEK scaffolds. The non-photo-responsive PEEK group was set as a negative control without photo-irradiation, while the MoS 2 @PEEK group was designated as both the positive control and phototherapy treatment group. Subsequently, MoS 2 @PEEK was irradiated with the light at wavelength of 650 nm (PDT), 808 nm (PTT), as well as under dual-phototherapeutic conditions involving sequential irradiation with both wavelengths. As a result, under conditions without light irradiation, osteosarcoma cells maintained high viability on both PEEK and MoS₂@PEEK exhibiting a higher cell attachment density on MoS 2 @PEEK, which incorporates bioactive feature of 2D MoS 2 , compared to the PEEK. Subsequently, cellular behavior was analyzed after irradiation with 650 nm and 808 nm, either individually or in combination, followed by 1 and 3 days of cell culturing. On day 1, partial cell death was observed in the MoS 2 @PEEK (PDT) group irradiated with 650 nm only, while the MoS 2 @PEEK (PTT) group irradiated with 808 nm only showed a more pronounced cytotoxic effect compared to the PDT group. However, in both conditions, cancer cells were not complete eliminated, and remaining residual cells were observed. In contrast, in the MoS 2 @PEEK (Dual) group, where 808 nm irradiation was applied sequentially after 650 nm irradiation, complete cell death with no surviving cells were observed ( Fig. S14 ). By day 3, cells proliferated rapidly in both the PEEK and MoS 2 @PEEK groups, confirming high density cell survival, whereas in the MoS 2 @PEEK (PDT) and MoS 2 @PEEK (PTT) groups exhibited moderate cytotoxicity, and the proliferation of residual cancer cells was observed. However, in the MoS₂@PEEK (Dual) group, complete cell death was shown, clearly confirming the synergistic therapeutic effect resulting from the combined application of PDT and PTT (Fig. 3 a and Fig. S15 ). Subsequently, the extent of cancer cell death was evaluated quantitatively as shown in Fig. 3 b. Under conditions without photo-irradiation, MoS 2 @PEEK exhibited a higher tendency for cell adhesion and proliferation compared to PEEK, and cell viability was significantly increased on day 3. In contrast, in the MoS₂@PEEK (PDT) group, 16.13% cell death was observed on day 1 compared to PEEK. However, on day 3, the survival rate increased by 38.12% due to the proliferation of residual cells. In the MoS 2 @PEEK (PTT) group, 48.67% cell death was observed on day 1, indicating higher therapeutic efficacy than the PDT group. However, the survival rate increased by 41.22% on day 3, due to the proliferation of residual cells. In contrast, the MoS 2 @PEEK (Dual) group induced complete cell death on day 1, and no proliferation of residual cancer cells was observed thereafter. These results suggest that the combined application of PDT and PTT induces a significantly enhanced anticancer effect compared to monotherapy, and that complete elimination of cancer cells is achievable through the synergistic interaction of the two therapeutic modalities [ 47 , 57 ]. This can be attributed to the generation of ROS under PDT conditions inducing lipid peroxidation in cell membranes, compromising membrane integrity, and inhibiting enzyme activity and cellular function through the oxidative denaturation of proteins. Furthermore, by disrupting the mitochondrial membrane potential and inhibiting ATP production, ROS disrupt cellular energy metabolism, ultimately leading to cell death or necrosis. However, as ROS are highly reactive, their diffusion within cells is limited, and they can be partially eliminated by intracellular antioxidant systems, which limits to induce uniform and complete cell death throughout the entire cell [ 58 ]. In contrast, heat induced under PTT conditions causes nonselective and irreversible damage throughout the cell. The rise in temperature increases the fluidity of the cell membrane and destabilizes the lipid bilayer, thereby increasing membrane permeability, which leads to the leakage of cellular contents and the disruption of ion homeostasis. Simultaneously, thermal denaturation of proteins, enzyme inactivation, mitochondrial dysfunction, and cytoskeletal collapse are induced, leading to cell death. However, as heat dissipates into the surrounding environment, some cells may survive if the local temperature is not maintained above a certain level, and complete elimination of cells is limited due to the adaptive response of cells to heat stress [ 59 , 60 ]. In contrast, under dual-phototherapy conditions, cell death proceeds irreversibly as initial cell damage caused by ROS and subsequent damage caused by induced heat consecutively. Although oxidative damage induced by PDT does not immediately induce cell death, it renders cell membranes and intracellular structures vulnerable and partially disrupts the antioxidant defense system. Under these conditions, when additional thermal stress is applied via PTT, the already damaged cell membranes collapse more easily, and the denaturation of proteins and organelles accelerates, leading to irreversible loss of cellular function [ 47 ]. Furthermore, the rise in temperature increases the reaction rate of ROS and promotes their diffusion within the cell, thereby further amplifying oxidative damage. Consequently, while under single PDT or PTT conditions, the respective damage mechanisms act partially, leaving residual cells, under dual-phototherapy conditions, chemical and physical damage interact synergistically. This simultaneously disrupts the structural and functional elements essential for cell survival, leading to complete cell death [ 61 ]. 3.5 In vitro Synergistic Dual-Phototherapeutic Antibacterial Performance of MoS 2 @PEEK Scaffold Along with tumor recurrence, bacterial infection at the surgical site represents another critical clinical challenge. Bacterial infection triggers an inflammatory response, promoting the excessive secretion of inflammatory cytokines, thereby increasing cellular toxicity and delaying tissue healing. Furthermore, biofilms formed by bacteria can increase antibiotic resistance and induce immune evasion, potentially leading to chronic infection. This infectious environment not only inhibits cell adhesion and proliferation but also significantly impairs bone regeneration by suppressing osteogenesis-related signaling pathways [ 62 , 63 ]. Consequently, inadequate control of bacterial infection can further compromise tissue regeneration and worsen long-term clinical outcomes [ 64 , 65 ]. To address this challenge, this study further investigated the potential of MoS₂@PEEK scaffolds as a dual photo-responsive antibacterial platform utilizing external light stimulation. In particular, we aimed to evaluate the antibacterial efficacy induced by PTT and PDT, both individually and in combination (dual-phototherapy), under controlled irradiation conditions. The antibacterial activity under the same phototherapy conditions used for tumor ablation was evaluated. To verify the photoresponsive antimicrobial effect of the MoS 2 @PEEK scaffold, Escherichia coli ( E. coli ), a representative Gram-negative bacterium, and Staphylococcus aureus ( S. aureus ), a Gram-positive bacterium, were comprehensively analyzed for morphological changes, the extent of death, and colony-forming ability. The morphology of each bacteria cultured on the samples depending on the phototherapy condition was observed by SEM. SEM morphology revealed that in the PEEK and MoS₂@PEEK groups, which were not subjected to light irradiation, E. coli appeared as rod-shaped bacteria, while S. aureus appeared as cocci arranged in a grape-like cluster. It was confirmed that both strains maintained their normal structures without cell membrane damage and were stably attached to the scaffold surface ( Fig. S16 ) [ 66 ]. In contrast, partial damage and deformation of the cell surface were observed in the MoS₂@PEEK (PDT) group, while more pronounced structural damage, such as cell membrane contraction and collapse, was confirmed in the MoS₂@PEEK (PTT) group. In particular, in the MoS₂@PEEK (Dual) group, severe disruption of the cell membrane and complete loss of bacterial morphology were observed, confirming a significantly enhanced synergistic antibacterial effect compared to each phototherapy in both strains (Fig. 3 c and d ). To confirm the extent of bacterial killing alongside these morphological changes, live/dead fluorescence staining was performed. In the PEEK and MoS₂@PEEK groups, green fluorescence indicating surviving bacteria was predominantly observed for both strains, while red fluorescence indicating death was rarely observed, confirming the high survival rate ( Fig. S17 ). In contrast, partial bacterial deaths was observed in the MoS₂@PEEK (PDT) and MoS₂@PEEK (PTT) groups, with a higher killing effect observed particularly in the PTT group. In the MoS₂@PEEK (Dual) group, however, only red fluorescence was observed in both strains, indicating complete bacterial death, thereby clearly confirming the synergistic effect resulting from the combined application of the two phototherapies (Fig. 3 e and f ). To quantitatively verify these antibacterial effects, a colony-forming ability analysis was performed. In the PEEK and MoS₂@PEEK groups, high levels of colony formation were observed for both bacterial strains, and no statistically significant differences were found ( Fig. S18 ). In contrast, in the MoS₂@PEEK (PDT) and MoS₂@PEEK (PTT) groups, the number of colonies decreased significantly, but the survival of some bacteria was still confirmed. In particular, in the MoS₂@PEEK (Dual) group, almost no colony formation was observed for either strain, indicating that complete bacterial killing was induced (Fig. 3 g and h ). Overall, the differences in antimicrobial effects observed in this study are interpreted as resulting from differences in the damage mechanisms acting on the bacteria and their interactions. Under PDT conditions, ROS partially damage the bacterial cell membrane and cell wall and inhibit metabolic functions. However, since the damage is localized, some extent of bacteria can survive [ 67 , 68 ]. In contrast, under PTT conditions, heat reduces the structural stability of the cell membrane and cell wall and induces morphological collapse; however, due to heat diffusion, there are limitations to completely eliminating all bacteria [ 69 ]. Under dual-phototherapy conditions, PTT further acts on bacterial structures weakened by PDT, accelerating the breakdown of cell membrane and cell wall. This leads to simultaneous leakage of intracellular contents and structural disintegration, resulting in irreversible damage. Consequently, while single-modality therapy results in only partial bacterial killing, dual-phototherapy induces complete bacterial killing through the simultaneous accumulation of structural and functional damage [ 67 , 70 ]. 3.6 In vitro Integrated Osteogenic and Angiogenic Regenerative Performance of MoS 2 @PEEK scaffold Following the therapeutic performances through photoresponsive-based anticancer and antibacterial effects, this study sought to assess cellular behavior during the regeneration phase post-treatment. In the context of actual bone regeneration, subsequent to tumor excision and infection management, it is imperative to continuously induce cell adhesion, proliferation, and differentiation within the compromised tissue environment. Notably, effective tissue reconstruction necessitates the concurrent occurrence of osteoblast activity and vascular formation [ 71 , 72 ]. Consequently, conditions conducive to inducing cellular responses while minimizing phototherapy-induced cell damage were applied during the regeneration stage. Although the same 808 nm NIR conditions were employed, the extent of thermal stimulation in normal cells is mitigated by cell–substrate interactions and the diffusion environment, unlike in cancer cells and bacteria [ 73 , 74 ]. Furthermore, photothermal stimulation devoid of accompanying ROS serves as a non-damaging stimulus. It is established that photothermal stimulation under these conditions enhances cell membrane fluidity and activates intracellular signal transduction, thereby facilitating cell adhesion and proliferation [ 75 ]. The experimental groups comprised four types based on scaffold type and irradiation status: PEEK (−), PEEK (+), MoS₂@PEEK (−), and MoS₂@PEEK (+), where (−) and (+) denote the absence or presence of 808 nm NIR, respectively. The irradiation intensity and duration were consistent with the conditions utilized in the preceding anticancer and antibacterial experiments, yet designed to compare variations in cellular responses within the regenerative environment. Utilizing the pre-osteoblast cell line MC3T3-E1 and the vascular endothelial cell HUVEC, we conducted a comprehensive evaluation of cell adhesion, proliferation, and differentiation behavior on the scaffold to verify biological compatibility and the potential for functional vascularized bone regeneration during the post-treatment regeneration stage. Cell adhesion represents the initial phase in scaffold based tissue regeneration and is a critical process that influences subsequent cell proliferation and differentiation. Specifically, cell adhesion is intricately linked to the development of an ECM like environment that facilitates cell-substrate interactions. The binding of cells to substrates, primarily through integrins, leads to the formation of focal adhesion complexes and the activation of intracellular signaling pathways. These mechanical and biochemical signals not only prompt cytoskeletal rearrangement and stabilization of cell morphology but also directly affect cell survival, proliferation, and differentiation via downstream signaling cascades [ 76 , 77 ]. In the case of osteoblasts, insufficient stable adhesion can impede actin cytoskeleton formation, potentially resulting in diminished expression of genes associated with osteogenic differentiation. Moreover, inadequate cell-substrate interactions can hinder the secretion and remodeling of ECM proteins, thereby limiting the establishment of a microenvironment essential for tissue regeneration [ 78 , 79 ]. Consequently, the initial cell adhesion characteristics on the scaffold surface serve as a predictive indicator for subsequent cell proliferation, differentiation, and ultimately, the efficacy of tissue regeneration [ 80 , 81 ]. From this standpoint, examining the initial cell adhesion behavior and morphological characteristics is deemed a crucial process for assessing the regeneration-friendly properties of MoS₂@PEEK scaffolds. 6 h post-seeding onto the scaffolds, cell adhesion behavior was evaluated using DAPI and phalloidin fluorescence staining as well as SEM analysis. As shown in Fig. 4 a, both PEEK (−) and PEEK (+) demonstrated limited cell adhesion, with cells tending to maintain a rounded morphology, showing no significant differences between the two. Conversely, on MoS₂@PEEK, the incorporation of 2D monolayer MoS₂ enhanced biological activity, resulting in cells spreading over a wider area, with the MoS₂@PEEK (+) group under NIR hyperthermia exhibiting the most pronounced cell adhesion behavior. To quantitatively evaluate cell adhesion, both fluorescence image-based cell adhesion density and SEM observation-based cell spreading area were analyzed. The fluorescence image analysis revealed no significant difference between PEEK (−) and PEEK (+), with values of 7.97 ± 1.24% and 7.36 ± 1.47%, respectively. In contrast, MoS₂@PEEK (−) exhibited a 157.21% increase to 20.5 ± 2.57% compared to PEEK (−), and MoS₂@PEEK (+) demonstrated a 250.69% increase to 27.95 ± 3.74% ( Fig. S19a ). SEM analysis of the average cell spreading area per cell indicated no significant difference between PEEK (−) and PEEK (+), but an increase to 337.33 µm² in MoS₂@PEEK (−) and 536.99 µm² in MoS₂@PEEK (+) compared to PEEK (−) ( Fig. S19b ). These findings clearly illustrate the enhanced biological activity on the surface due to MoS₂ incorporation and the improved cell adhesion effect from NIR hyperthermia [ 16 , 32 ]. Based on this initial cell adhesion, cell proliferation behavior was assessed to determine whether initial adhesion subsequently led to actual cell growth and tissue formation. As shown in Fig. 4 b, proliferation analysis showed no significant difference between PEEK (−) and PEEK (+) at both day 1 and day 3, indicating that light irradiation alone had no effect on cell proliferation in the light-inactive PEEK groups. Conversely, MoS₂@PEEK (−) exhibited a 36.27% increase at day 1 and 116.14% at day 3 compared to PEEK (−), while MoS₂@PEEK (+) showed the highest cell proliferation, with increases of 50.94% and 125.62% at day 1 and day 3, respectively, compared to PEEK (−). These results are interpreted as a synergistic effect of increased surface biological activity due to MoS₂ incorporation, alongside NIR-driven photothermal stimulation reinforcing cell–substrate interactions and activating intracellular signaling, thereby effectively promoting cell proliferation [ 32 , 82 ]. Building on these cell proliferation characteristics, the effect on osteogenic differentiation and functional maturation, beyond simple cell number increase, was analyzed to determine the potential for functional tissue formation. Osteogenic differentiation was assessed using alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity as an early differentiation marker, and alizarin red S (ARS) staining as a marker for mineral deposition. ALP is a key enzyme expressed during the early stage of osteoblast differentiation, acting a critical role in phosphate metabolism and initiating mineralization by providing inorganic phosphate for hydroxyapatite formation [ 83 , 84 ]. In parallel, ARS staining is employed to evaluate late-stage osteogenic differentiation by quantifying calcium-rich mineralized matrix deposition, which reflects the formation of mature bone-like tissue [ 85 , 86 ]. ALP analysis showed no significant difference between PEEK (−) and PEEK (+) up to day 14, however, MoS₂@PEEK (−) had a 14.96% increase at day 7 and a 43.70% increase at day 14 compared to PEEK (−). MoS₂@PEEK (+) showed the highest ALP activity, with increases of 17.91% at day 7 and 50.01% at day 14 versus PEEK (−) (Fig. 4 c). The findings indicate that the surface characteristics of MoS₂ and photothermal stimulation significantly enhance enzymatic activity and osteogenic signaling during the initial differentiation phase of osteoblasts. A similar pattern was observed in bone mineralization, as assessed by ARS staining. While the PEEK groups exhibited relatively weak staining intensity, the groups incorporating MoS₂ showed progressively greater red staining intensity, with the most pronounced red deposition observed in the MoS₂@PEEK (+) group under NIR hyperthermia, visually indicating the most active calcium-based mineral accumulation ( Fig. S20 ). Quantitative analysis supported these observations that MoS₂@PEEK (−) increased by 14.55% at day 7 and 23.51% at day 14 compared to PEEK (−), while MoS₂@PEEK (+) increased by 17.75% and 31.38% at day 7 and day 14, respectively, demonstrating the highest level of mineralization (Fig. 4 d). From the results, both the enhanced surface biological activity through MoS₂ incorporation and the NIR-based photothermal stimulation were found to sequentially augment not only cell adhesion and proliferation but also the early differentiation and late-stage mineral deposition (ARS) of osteoblasts. This suggests that MoS₂@PEEK scaffolds effectively provide a functional microenvironment conducive to bone regeneration [ 1 , 12 ]. Effective tissue formation during bone regeneration necessitates not only the activation of osteoblasts but also the provision of oxygen and nutrients through vascularization. Consequently, this study extends beyond osteoblast-based evaluation to analyze the biological behavior of vascular endothelial cells on the scaffold, thereby assessing the potential for vascularization within the regenerative microenvironment [ 87 , 88 ]. From this perspective, the ability of the scaffold surface to effectively induce the initial attachment interactions of vascular endothelial cells is considered a critical stage in predicting subsequent vascular formation and the potential for functional tissue regeneration [ 89 , 90 ]. Accordingly, using HUVECs, we initially evaluated the attachment behavior one day post-cell seeding through SEM and DAPI/phalloidin staining. The results indicated that, similar to osteoblasts, the PEEK group without photo-reactivity exhibited low cell attachment density and limited cytoplasmic spreading, irrespective of NIR irradiation. Conversely, in the MoS₂@PEEK (−) group, cell density and attachment were significantly enhanced due to increased surface bioactivity and interfacial interactions conferred by the MoS₂ monolayer. Furthermore, as depicted in Fig. 4 e, in the MoS₂@PEEK (+) group, where NIR-based hyperthermia stimulation was applied, the most pronounced initial cell attachment behavior was observed, suggesting that the MoS₂-based surface activation and hyperthermia stimulation synergistically enhanced cell attachment. Quantitative evaluation revealed no significant difference in cell attachment density between PEEK (−) and PEEK (+), based on fluorescence image analysis. MoS₂@PEEK (−) demonstrated a 12.8% increase, while MoS₂@PEEK (+) exhibited a 19% increase in cell density compared to PEEK (−) (Fig. 4 f). Furthermore, analysis of the average cell spreading area per cell, derived from SEM images, revealed no difference in the PEEK group with or without NIR exposure. In contrast, MoS₂@PEEK (−) and MoS₂@PEEK (+) showed increases of 409.98 µm² and 670.54 µm², respectively, over PEEK (−), confirming statistically significant enhancements in cell attachment (Fig. 4 g). These findings suggest that interfacial activation resulting from MoS₂ incorporation and NIR-induced hyperthermia effectively enhances initial cell–matrix interactions. To ascertain whether these initial interactions underpin the sustained growth and functional expansion of vascular endothelial cells, we assessed cell proliferation behavior. The results indicated no significant difference in the PEEK group between NIR and non-NIR conditions on both day 1 and day 3 post-cell attachment. Conversely, MoS₂@PEEK (−) exhibited a 6.89% increase on day 1 and a 13.33% increase on day 3 compared to PEEK (−), while MoS₂@PEEK (+) showed increases of 22.30% and 41.88% on days 1 and 3, respectively, indicating the highest cell proliferation (Fig. 4 h). This suggests that interfacial activation by the MoS₂ monolayer positively influences not only initial attachment but also the cell proliferation phase, with hyperthermia stimulation induced by NIR irradiation further enhancing cellular activation. In conclusion, the synergistic effects of increased surface biological activity due to MoS₂ introduction and hyperthermia stimulation induced by NIR irradiation effectively reinforced cell–implant interactions, significantly promoting cell attachment, proliferation, and functional activation. This trend was consistently observed in both osteoblasts and vascular endothelial cells, indicating that the NIR-stimulated MoS₂@PEEK platform provides an integrated regenerative microenvironment capable of simultaneously inducing vascularization and bone regeneration [ 91 , 92 ]. 4. Conclusion Our study proposes a personalized orthopedic scaffold-based theragenerative platform that effectively induce antitumor, antibacterial, and vascularized bone tissue regenerative effects. This approach was achieved by fabricating patient-specific 3D-printed scaffolds using manufactured PEEK filaments, followed by the surface functionalization with 2D monolayer MoS₂ using a polymer-assisted transfer process that was synthesized from MoO₂ nanoparticle precursors via a nanoseed initiated APCVD process. The resulting MoS₂@PEEK scaffold, characterized by uniform thin-film structural integrity and exceptional shape reproducibility, offers high design flexibility to accommodate various anatomical defect sites. Importantly, the MoS₂-based surface exhibits pronounced dual photoresponsiveness, enabling the precise and non-invasive induction of combined photothermal and photodynamic effects under external stimulation. Furthermore, the MoS₂ interface compensates for the previously lacking therapeutic and regenerative functions of PEEK, conferring antitumor and antibacterial capabilities under dual wavelength irradiation while significantly enhancing cell adhesion, proliferation, and differentiation. Through the synergistic effects of these two photo-responsive therapeutic mechanisms, the MoS 2 @PEEK scaffold achieved effective tumor cell ablation and significant antibacterial performance. Furthermore, under the same photothermal stimulation conditions, the MoS₂ active interface dynamically regulates the cellular microenvironment, promoting the activation of osteoblasts and vascular endothelial cells and inducing biological behaviors conducive to vascularized bone regeneration. As a result, the MoS₂@PEEK scaffold demonstrated its potential as a multifunctional theragenerative platform capable of integrating tumor suppression, infection control, and tissue regeneration. Although further validation regarding long-term in vivo stability and immune responses is required, the MoS₂@PEEK-based theragenerative platform proposed in this study is suggested to be a promising strategy capable of comprehensively resolving the complex clinical issues arising after surgical resection of osteosarcoma on a single platform. Furthermore, this scaffold, realized through the convergence of 3D printing-based patient-specific design and 2D nanomaterial-based surface engineering, presents significant potential as a next-generation theragenerative platform for future tissue engineering and orthopedic clinical applications. Declarations Author Contributions J. H. Seo, and I. H. Choi contributed equally to this work. J. H. Seo, and I. H. Choi wrote the manuscript all of the activities. M.-H. Kang, and H.-D. Jung edited the manuscript. S. J. Bang, H. S. Kang, J. Y. Gwon, C. H. Moon, N. Y. Lee, and G. W. Kim supported the fabrication of the 3D-printed PEEK and performed the structural and mechanical analyses. J. H. Kim, H. J. Joo, J. H. Kim, Y. H. Cho, E. S. Song, and S. J. Choi assisted the synthesis of the 2D monolayer MoS 2 . J. W. Park, D. J. Kim, and S. S. Kang contributed to TEM imaging and analyzing the structure. K. S. Yang, G. D. Cha, and S.-H. Lee contributed to explanation of in vitro tests. J. H. Seo, I. H. Choi, M.-H. Kang, and H.-D. Jung contributed to interpretation and discussion of the results. Declaration of Competing Interest s The authors declare no competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have influenced the work reported in this study. Acknowledgements We gratefully acknowledge the technical assistance and support provided by the contributors to this study. Funding This work was supported by the Nano & Material Technology Development Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by Ministry of Science and ICT (MSIT) (RS-2026-25537604) and the NRF grant funded by the Korea government (No. RS-2024-00405381; RS-2025-00513935; No. RS-2025-00521275); and the Korea Institute of Marine Science & Technology Promotion (KIMST) funded by the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries (RS-2024-00405273); and Korean Fund for Regenerative Medicine (KFRM) grant funded by the Korea government (the Ministry of Science and ICT, the Ministry of Health & Welfare, KFRM 24A0105L1); and Korea Basic Science Institute (National research Facilities and Equipment Center) grant funded by the Ministry of Science and ICT (No. RS-2025-00564228). This study was supported by the Research Fund, 2024 of The Catholic University of Korea. Data availability Data will be made available on request. Declaration of Competing Interest s The authors declare no competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have influenced the work reported in this study. References W. Dai, Y. Zheng, B. Li, F. Yang, W. Chen, Y. Li et al., A 3D-printed orthopedic implant with dual-effect synergy based on MoS2 and hydroxyapatite nanoparticles for tumor therapy and bone regeneration. Colloids Surf., B 228 , 113384 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfb.2023.113384 J. Shi, J. Li, Y. Wang, J. Cheng, C.Y. Zhang, Recent advances in MoS(2)-based photothermal therapy for cancer and infectious disease treatment. J. Mater. Chem. B 8 (27), 5793–5807 (2020). 10.1039/d0tb01018a L. Vidal, C. Kampleitner, M.A. Brennan, A. Hoornaert, P. Layrolle, Reconstruction of Large Skeletal Defects: Current Clinical Therapeutic Strategies and Future Directions Using 3D Printing. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 8 (61) (2020). 10.3389/fbioe.2020.00061 W.J. Chong, A. Sola, Y. Li, P.F.A. Wright, C. Wen, Synergistic Advances in Additive Manufacturing and Surface Engineering for Polymeric Biomedical Devices. ACS Polym. Au. 5 (6), 781–810 (2025). 10.1021/acspolymersau.5c00102 P. Qiu, V. Bennani, P. Cooper, G. Dias, J. Ratnayake, Surface chemistry on PEEK surfaces: From enhanced biofunctionality to improved surface modifiability. Appl. Mater. Today. 41 (2024). 10.1016/j.apmt.2024.102523 I.V. Panayotov, V. Orti, F. Cuisinier, J. Yachouh, Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) for medical applications. J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Med. 27 (7), 118 (2016). 10.1007/s10856-016-5731-4 H.-D. Jung, S. Park, H. Kang, M.-H. Lee, S.-M. Kim, H.-E. Estrin, Polyetheretherketone/magnesium composite selectively coated with hydroxyapatite for enhanced in vitro bio-corrosion resistance and biocompatibility. Mater. Lett. 116 , 20–22 (2014). 10.1016/j.matlet.2013.10.062 H.D. Jung, H.S. Park, M.H. Kang, Y. Li, H.E. Kim, Y.H. Koh et al., Reinforcement of polyetheretherketone polymer with titanium for improved mechanical properties and in vitro biocompatibility. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. B Appl. Biomater. 104 (1), 141–148 (2016). 10.1002/jbm.b.33361 T.S. Jang, S.J. Park, J.E. Lee, J. Yang, S.H. Park, M.B.G. Jun et al., Topography-Supported Nanoarchitectonics of Hybrid Scaffold for Systematically Modulated Bone Regeneration and Remodeling. Adv. Funct. Mater. 32 (51) (2022). 10.1002/adfm.202206863 S. Wang, F. Wang, X. Zhao, F. Yang, Y. Xu, F. Yan et al., The effect of near-infrared light-assisted photothermal therapy combined with polymer materials on promoting bone regeneration: A systematic review. Mater. Design. 217 (2022). 10.1016/j.matdes.2022.110621 A. Salehi Moghaddam, M. Bahrami, E. Sarikhani, R. Tutar, Y.N. Ertas, F. Tamimi et al., Engineering the Immune Response to Biomaterials. Adv. Sci. (Weinh). 12 (19), e2414724 (2025). 10.1002/advs.202414724 U. Yadav, H. Mishra, V. Singh, S. Kashyap, A. Srivastava, S. Yadav et al., Enhanced Osteogenesis by Molybdenum Disulfide Nanosheet Reinforced Hydroxyapatite Nanocomposite Scaffolds. ACS Biomater. Sci. Eng. 5 (9), 4511–4521 (2019). 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.9b00227 F. Chen, Y. Luo, X. Liu, Y. Zheng, Y. Han, D. Yang et al., 2D Molybdenum Sulfide-Based Materials for Photo-Excited Antibacterial Application. Adv. Healthc. Mater. 11 (13), e2200360 (2022). 10.1002/adhm.202200360 T. Liu, Z. Liu, 2D MoS(2) Nanostructures for Biomedical Applications. Adv. Healthc. Mater. 7 (8), e1701158 (2018). 10.1002/adhm.201701158 A. Kumar, A. Sood, S.S. Han, Molybdenum disulfide (MoS(2))-based nanostructures for tissue engineering applications: prospects and challenges. J. Mater. Chem. B 10 (15), 2761–2780 (2022). 10.1039/d2tb00131d S. Bharti, S.K. Tripathi, K. Singh, Recent progress in MoS(2) nanostructures for biomedical applications: Experimental and computational approach. Anal. Biochem. 685 (115404) (2024). 10.1016/j.ab.2023.115404 M.H. Shin, S.M. Baek, A.V. Polyakov, I.P. Semenova, R.Z. Valiev, W.B. Hwang et al., Molybdenum Disulfide Surface Modification of Ultrafine-Grained Titanium for Enhanced Cellular Growth and Antibacterial Effect. Sci. Rep. 8 (1), 9907 (2018). 10.1038/s41598-018-28367-0 K.A. Singh, J. Soukar, M. Zulkifli, A. Kersey, G. Lokhande, S. Ghosh et al., Atomic vacancies of molybdenum disulfide nanoparticles stimulate mitochondrial biogenesis. Nat. Commun. 15 (1), 8136 (2024). 10.1038/s41467-024-52276-8 R. Wu, M. Dong, L. Liu, Nano–Bio Interface of Molybdenum Disulfide for Biological Applications. Coatings. 13 (6) (2023). 10.3390/coatings13061122 Z. Ye, C. Tan, X. Huang, Y. Ouyang, L. Yang, Z. Wang et al., Emerging MoS(2) Wafer-Scale Technique for Integrated Circuits. Nanomicro Lett. 15 (1), 38 (2023). 10.1007/s40820-022-01010-4 J. Kim, H. Seung, D. Kang, J. Kim, H. Bae, H. Park et al., Wafer-Scale Production of Transition Metal Dichalcogenides and Alloy Monolayers by Nanocrystal Conversion for Large-Scale Ultrathin Flexible Electronics. Nano Lett. 21 (21), 9153–9163 (2021). 10.1021/acs.nanolett.1c02991 H. Lee, G. Han, Y. Na, M. Kang, S.J. Bang, H.S. Kang et al., 3D-Printed Tissue‐Specific Nanospike‐Based Adhesive Materials for Time‐Regulated Synergistic Tumor Therapy and Tissue Regeneration In Vivo. Adv. Funct. Mater. 34 (48) (2024). 10.1002/adfm.202406237 J. Zheng, H. Zhao, Z. Ouyang, X. Zhou, J. Kang, C. Yang et al., Additively-manufactured PEEK/HA porous scaffolds with excellent osteogenesis for bone tissue repairing. Compos. Part. B: Eng. 232 (2022). 10.1016/j.compositesb.2021.109508 X. Wei, W. Zhou, Z. Tang, H. Wu, Y. Liu, H. Dong et al., Magnesium surface-activated 3D printed porous PEEK scaffolds for in vivo osseointegration by promoting angiogenesis and osteogenesis. Bioact Mater. 20 , 16–28 (2023). 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2022.05.011 H.D. Jung, T.S. Jang, J.E. Lee, S.J. Park, Y. Son, S.H. Park, Enhanced bioactivity of titanium-coated polyetheretherketone implants created by a high-temperature 3D printing process. Biofabrication. 11 (4), 045014 (2019). 10.1088/1758-5090/ab376b H. Zhang, Y. Wang, H. Qiang, D. Leng, L. Yang, X. Hu et al., Exploring the frontiers: The potential and challenges of bioactive scaffolds in osteosarcoma treatment and bone regeneration. Mater. Today Bio. 29 (101276) (2024). 10.1016/j.mtbio.2024.101276 M. Zhao, H. Yang, Q. Yang, C. Zhang, J. Liu, Z. Wu et al., A Multifunctional PEEK Composite Scaffold with Immunomodulatory, Angiogenic, and Osteogenic Properties for Enhanced Bone Regeneration. Polym. (Basel). 17 (9) (2025). 10.3390/polym17091206 Y. Zhang, L. Wang, X. Long, C. Yan, Q. Wang, D. Huang et al., Multi-functional PEEK implants enhance osseointegration in OVX rat by remodeling the bone immune microenvironment. Colloids Surf. B Biointerfaces. 245 (114219) (2025). 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2024.114219 W. Li, Z. Su, Y. Hu, L. Meng, F. Zhu, B. Xie et al., Functional and structural construction of photothermal-responsive PEEK composite implants to promote bone regeneration and bone-implant integration. Compos. Sci. Technol. 258 (2024). 10.1016/j.compscitech.2024.110885 C. Zhu, M. He, D. Sun, Y. Huang, L. Huang, M. Du et al., 3D-Printed Multifunctional Polyetheretherketone Bone Scaffold for Multimodal Treatment of Osteosarcoma and Osteomyelitis. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces. 13 (40), 47327–47340 (2021). 10.1021/acsami.1c10898 A.R. Zanjanijam, I. Major, J.G. Lyons, U. Lafont, D.M. Devine, Fused filament fabrication of PEEK: a review of process-structure-property relationships. Polymers. 12 (8), 1665 (2020) S. Roy, K.A. Deo, K.A. Singh, H.P. Lee, A. Jaiswal, A.K. Gaharwar, Nano-bio interactions of 2D molybdenum disulfide. Adv. Drug Deliv Rev. 187 (114361) (2022). 10.1016/j.addr.2022.114361 van der T.A.B. Boon, L.E. Tromp, L. Ge, L. Yang, C.F. Guimaraes, P.T. Kuhn et al., Double-Orthogonal Gradient-Based High-Throughput Screening Platform for Studying Cell Response Toward Combined Physicochemical Biomaterial Properties. Small Sci. 4 (1), 2300172 (2024). 10.1002/smsc.202300172 L.E. Tromp, de R. Jong, van der T.A.B. Boon, A.R. Mahecha, R. Bank, de J. Boer et al., Harnessing the power of physicochemical material property screening to direct breast epithelial and breast cancer cells. Bioact Mater. 50 , 494–509 (2025). 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2025.04.003 H. Liu, J. Zhao, T.H. Ly, Clean Transfer of Two-Dimensional Materials: A Comprehensive Review. ACS Nano. 18 (18), 11573–11597 (2024). 10.1021/acsnano.4c01000 A.Y. Rwei, W. Wang, D.S. Kohane, Photoresponsive nanoparticles for drug delivery. Nano Today. 10 (4), 451–467 (2015). 10.1016/j.nantod.2015.06.004 T. Liu, C. Wang, W. Cui, H. Gong, C. Liang, X. Shi et al., Combined photothermal and photodynamic therapy delivered by PEGylated MoS 2 nanosheets. Nanoscale. 6 (19), 11219–11225 (2014) R. Jin, J. Yang, P. Ding, C. Li, B. Zhang, W. Chen et al., Antitumor immunity triggered by photothermal therapy and photodynamic therapy of a 2D MoS(2) nanosheet-incorporated injectable polypeptide-engineered hydrogel combinated with chemotherapy for 4T1 breast tumor therapy. Nanotechnology. 31 (20), 205102 (2020). 10.1088/1361-6528/ab72b9 H. Shu, Y. Li, X. Niu, J. Wang, Greatly Enhanced Optical Absorption of a Defective MoS2 Monolayer through Oxygen Passivation. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces. 8 (20), 13150–13156 (2016). 10.1021/acsami.6b03242 Z. Nie, R. Long, J.S. Teguh, C.-C. Huang, D.W. Hewak, E.K.L. Yeow et al., Ultrafast Electron and Hole Relaxation Pathways in Few-Layer MoS2. J. Phys. Chem. C 119 (35), 20698–20708 (2015). 10.1021/acs.jpcc.5b05048 C.M. Frausto-Avila, V.M. Arellano-Arreola, J.M. Yañez Limon, De A. Luna-Bugallo, S. Gomès, P.-O. Chapuis, Thermal boundary conductance of CVD-grown MoS2 monolayer-on-silica substrate determined by scanning thermal microscopy. Appl. Phys. Lett. 120 (26), (2022) A.J. Gabourie, Ç. Köroğlu, E. Pop, Substrate-dependence of monolayer MoS2 thermal conductivity and thermal boundary conductance. J. Appl. Phys. 131 (19), (2022) Q. Li, B. Hu, Q. Yang, X. Cai, M. Nie, Y. Jin et al., Interaction mechanism between multi-layered MoS(2) and H(2)O(2) for self-generation of reactive oxygen species. Environ. Res. 191 (110227) (2020). 10.1016/j.envres.2020.110227 M.T.L. Lai, K.M. Lee, T.C.K. Yang, G.T. Pan, C.W. Lai, C.-Y. Chen et al., The improved photocatalytic activity of highly expanded MoS 2 under visible light emitting diodes. Nanoscale Adv. 3 (4), 1106–1120 (2021) M.Y. Peng, D.W. Zheng, S.B. Wang, S.X. Cheng, X.Z. Zhang, Multifunctional Nanosystem for Synergistic Tumor Therapy Delivered by Two-Dimensional MoS(2). ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces. 9 (16), 13965–13975 (2017). 10.1021/acsami.7b03276 M. Overchuk, R.A. Weersink, B.C. Wilson, G. Zheng, Photodynamic and Photothermal Therapies: Synergy Opportunities for Nanomedicine. ACS Nano. 17 (9), 7979–8003 (2023). 10.1021/acsnano.3c00891 J.H. Seo, D.S. Won, H. Lee, S. Bang, H.S. Kang, J.Y. Gwon et al., Mechanically Robust Biodegradable Stents With Theragenerative Vascular Responses via Combined 3D Printing and Janus Nanoengineering. Adv. Sci. (Weinh). e23965 (2026). 10.1002/advs.202523965 Y. Na, Y. Park, H. Lee, S.H. Kim, S. Bang, H.S. Kang et al., Joule-Assisted Nanotherapeutic Urethral Stent (JANUS) for Spatiotemporal Theragenerative Treatment of Urethral Strictures. Adv. Funct. Mater. 35 (37) (2025). 10.1002/adfm.202416694 J.H. Seo, H.-D. Jung, From antimicrobial attack to regeneration: AI-feedback bioelectronics for wound healing. Cell. Biomaterials. 2 (3) (2026). 10.1016/j.celbio.2026.100371 Y. Zhang, H. Li, L. Wang, H. Wang, X. Xie, S.L. Zhang et al., Photothermoelectric and photovoltaic effects both present in MoS2. Sci. Rep. 5 (7938) (2015). 10.1038/srep07938 G.A. Katsifis, N. Suchowerska, D.R. McKenzie, Optical properties of plasma-treated PEEK: Monitoring colour and crystallinity for applications in medicine and dentistry using ellipsometry. Plasma Processes Polym. 19 (6) (2022). 10.1002/ppap.202100241 P.S. Yarmolenko, E.J. Moon, C. Landon, A. Manzoor, D.W. Hochman, B.L. Viglianti et al., Thresholds for thermal damage to normal tissues: an update. Int. J. Hyperth. 27 (4), 320–343 (2011). 10.3109/02656736.2010.534527 J. Wang, L. Sui, J. Huang, L. Miao, Y. Nie, K. Wang et al., MoS(2)-based nanocomposites for cancer diagnosis and therapy. Bioact Mater. 6 (11), 4209–4242 (2021). 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.04.021 X. Yu, S. Wu, X. Wang, M. Xu, S. Xu, Y. Yuan, Late post-operative recurrent osteosarcoma: Three case reports with a review of the literature. Oncol. Lett. 6 (1), 23–27 (2013). 10.3892/ol.2013.1322 A. Takeuchi, V.O. Lewis, R.L. Satcher, B.S. Moon, P.P. Lin, What are the factors that affect survival and relapse after local recurrence of osteosarcoma? Clin. Orthop. Relat. Research®. 472 (10), 3188–3195 (2014) S. Guo, Z. Song, D.K. Ji, G. Reina, J.D. Fauny, Y. Nishina et al., Combined Photothermal and Photodynamic Therapy for Cancer Treatment Using a Multifunctional Graphene Oxide. Pharmaceutics. 14 (7) (2022). 10.3390/pharmaceutics14071365 S. Akter, R. Madhuvilakku, A.K. Kar, I.S. Nila, P. Liu, H. Inuzuka et al., Reactive oxygen species (ROS) in cancer: from mechanism to therapeutic implications. Signal. Transduct. Target. Ther. 11 (1) (2026). 10.1038/s41392-026-02583-x M. Salimi, S. Mosca, B. Gardner, F. Palombo, P. Matousek, N. Stone, Nanoparticle-Mediated Photothermal Therapy Limitation in Clinical Applications Regarding Pain Management. Nanomaterials (Basel). 12 (6) (2022). 10.3390/nano12060922 X. Guo, M. Zhang, J. Qin, Z. Li, C. Rankl, X. Jiang et al., Revealing the Effect of Photothermal Therapy on Human Breast Cancer Cells: A Combined Study from Mechanical Properties to Membrane HSP70. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces. 15 (18), 21965–21973 (2023). 10.1021/acsami.3c02964 A. Urazaliyeva, P. Kanabekova, A. Beisenbayev, G. Kulsharova, T. Atabaev, S. Kim et al., All organic nanomedicine for PDT-PTT combination therapy of cancer cells in hypoxia. Sci. Rep. 14 (1), 17507 (2024). 10.1038/s41598-024-68077-4 M. Croes, van der B.C.H. Wal, H.C. Vogely, Impact of Bacterial Infections on Osteogenesis: Evidence From In Vivo Studies. J. Orthop. Res. 37 (10), 2067–2076 (2019). 10.1002/jor.24422 M.A. Rather, K. Gupta, M. Mandal, Microbial biofilm: formation, architecture, antibiotic resistance, and control strategies. Brazilian J. Microbiol. 52 (4), 1701–1718 (2021) Y.F. Liu, P.W. Ni, Y. Huang, T. Xie, Therapeutic strategies for chronic wound infection. Chin. J. Traumatol. 25 (1), 11–16 (2022). 10.1016/j.cjtee.2021.07.004 S.H. Kim, J.H. Lee, S.E. Kim, S.H. Shin, H.J. Kim, S.J. Lee et al., Retrospective study of the efficacy of vascularized tissue transfer for treating antibiotic-resistant bacteria-infected wound: Comparison with clean and antibiotic-sensitive bacteria-infected wound. Med. (Baltim). 100 (23) (2021). 10.1097/MD.0000000000025907 . e25907 C. Mao, Y. Xiang, X. Liu, Y. Zheng, K.W.K. Yeung, Z. Cui et al., Local Photothermal/Photodynamic Synergistic Therapy by Disrupting Bacterial Membrane To Accelerate Reactive Oxygen Species Permeation and Protein Leakage. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces. 11 (19), 17902–17914 (2019). 10.1021/acsami.9b05787 T.N. Demidova, F. Gad, T. Zahra, K.P. Francis, M.R. Hamblin, Monitoring photodynamic therapy of localized infections by bioluminescence imaging of genetically engineered bacteria. J. Photochem. Photobiol B 81 (1), 15–25 (2005). 10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2005.05.007 X. Yi, Q.Y. Duan, F.G. Wu, Low-Temperature Photothermal Therapy: Strategies and Applications. Research (Wash D C) 2021(9816594 (2021). 10.34133/2021/9816594 K. Bilici, N. Atac, A. Muti, I. Baylam, O. Dogan, A. Sennaroglu et al., Broad spectrum antibacterial photodynamic and photothermal therapy achieved with indocyanine green loaded SPIONs under near infrared irradiation. Biomater. Sci. 8 (16), 4616–4625 (2020). 10.1039/d0bm00821d Q. Liu, F. Long, C. Zhang, Y. Liu, H. He, W. Luo, Biological reconstruction of bone defect after resection of malignant bone tumor by allograft: a single-center retrospective cohort study. World J. Surg. Oncol. 21 (1), 234 (2023). 10.1186/s12957-023-03121-7 L.C. Mariano, M.H.R. Fernandes, P.S. Gomes, Antimicrobial Biomaterials for the Healing of Infected Bone Tissue: A Systematic Review of Microtomographic Data on Experimental Animal Models. J. Funct. Biomater. 13 (4) (2022). 10.3390/jfb13040193 A. Amaroli, S. Ravera, F. Baldini, S. Benedicenti, I. Panfoli, L. Vergani, Photobiomodulation with 808-nm diode laser light promotes wound healing of human endothelial cells through increased reactive oxygen species production stimulating mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation. Lasers Med. Sci. 34 (3), 495–504 (2019) S. Nomura, Y. Morimoto, H. Tsujimoto, M. Arake, M. Harada, D. Saitoh et al., Highly reliable, targeted photothermal cancer therapy combined with thermal dosimetry using a near-infrared absorbent. Sci. Rep. 10 (1), 9765 (2020). 10.1038/s41598-020-66646-x Y. Qu, K. Lu, Y. Zheng, C. Huang, G. Wang, Y. Zhang et al., Photothermal scaffolds/surfaces for regulation of cell behaviors. Bioact Mater. 8 , 449–477 (2022). 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.05.052 K. Katoh, Integrin and Its Associated Proteins as a Mediator for Mechano-Signal Transduction. Biomolecules. 15 (2) (2025). 10.3390/biom15020166 Y. Zhang, Y. He, S. Bharadwaj, N. Hammam, K. Carnagey, R. Myers et al., Tissue-specific extracellular matrix coatings for the promotion of cell proliferation and maintenance of cell phenotype. Biomaterials. 30 (23–24), 4021–4028 (2009). 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2009.04.005 X. Lin, S. Patil, Y.G. Gao, A. Qian, The Bone Extracellular Matrix in Bone Formation and Regeneration. Front. Pharmacol. 11 (757) (2020). 10.3389/fphar.2020.00757 M. Biggs, R. Richards, S. McFarlane, C. Wilkinson, R. Oreffo, M. Dalby, Adhesion formation of primary human osteoblasts and the functional response of mesenchymal stem cells to 330 nm deep microgrooves. J. Royal Soc. Interface. 5 (27), 1231–1242 (2008) D. Dranseike, D.V. Deshmukh, M.W. Tibbitt, C. Labouesse, Cell Adhesion by Design: Engineering Tissue Culture Scaffolds With Adhesion Cues. Adv. Mater. Interfaces. (2026). 10.1002/admi.202500960 S. Chen, C.J. Gil, L. Ning, L. Jin, L. Perez, G. Kabboul et al., Adhesive Tissue Engineered Scaffolds: Mechanisms and Applications. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 9 (683079) (2021). 10.3389/fbioe.2021.683079 A. Carmignani, T. Yamazaki, M. Battaglini, C.Q. Vu, A. Marino, S. Takayanagi-Kiya et al., Cellular Activity Modulation Mediated by Near Infrared-Irradiated Polydopamine Nanoparticles: In Vitro and Ex Vivo Investigation. ACS Nano. 19 (17), 16267–16286 (2025). 10.1021/acsnano.5c04181 S. Vimalraj, Alkaline phosphatase: Structure, expression and its function in bone mineralization. Gene. 754 (144855) (2020). 10.1016/j.gene.2020.144855 S. Ansari, K. Ito, S. Hofmann, Alkaline Phosphatase Activity of Serum Affects Osteogenic Differentiation Cultures. ACS Omega. 7 (15), 12724–12733 (2022). 10.1021/acsomega.1c07225 V. Palmieri, M. Barba, Di L. Pietro, C. Conti, De M. Spirito, W. Lattanzi et al., Graphene Oxide Induced Osteogenesis Quantification by In-Situ 2D-Fluorescence Spectroscopy. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 19 (11) (2018). 10.3390/ijms19113336 M. Koblenzer, M. Weiler, A. Fragoulis, S. Rutten, T. Pufe, H. Jahr, Physiological Mineralization during In Vitro Osteogenesis in a Biomimetic Spheroid Culture Model. Cells. 11 (17) (2022). 10.3390/cells11172702 F. Simunovic, G. Finkenzeller, Vascularization Strategies in Bone Tissue Engineering. Cells. 10 (7) (2021). 10.3390/cells10071749 S. Chen, X. Zhou, T. Li, C. He, Vascularization and Innervation for Bone Tissue Engineering. Acc. Mater. Res. 5 (9), 1121–1133 (2024). 10.1021/accountsmr.4c00165 X. Ren, Y. Feng, J. Guo, H. Wang, Q. Li, J. Yang et al., Surface modification and endothelialization of biomaterials as potential scaffolds for vascular tissue engineering applications. Chem. Soc. Rev. 44 (15), 5680–5742 (2015) B.M. Whited, M.N. Rylander, The influence of electrospun scaffold topography on endothelial cell morphology, alignment, and adhesion in response to fluid flow. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 111 (1), 184–195 (2014). 10.1002/bit.24995 X. Chen, Y.J. Park, M. Kang, S.K. Kang, J. Koo, S.M. Shinde et al., CVD-grown monolayer MoS(2) in bioabsorbable electronics and biosensors. Nat. Commun. 9 (1), 1690 (2018). 10.1038/s41467-018-03956-9 M. Chen, M. Ren, X. Liu, Z. Wang, Y. Shi, Z. Wu et al., Synergistic enhancement of angiogenesis and osseointegration in 3D-printed porous polyetheretherketone scaffolds using biomimetic coatings of bone morphogenetic protein-2/fibronectin. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 297 , 139876 (2025). 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2025.139876 Scheme 1 Scheme 1 is available in the Supplementary Files section. Supplementary Files image1.png Scheme 1. Schematic illustration of the fabrication of a 2D MoS₂-conformal 3D-printed PEEK scaffold (MoS 2 @PEEK) and its application as a dual photo-responsive theragenerative platform for osteosarcoma defect treatment. Patient-specific PEEK scaffolds were fabricated via melt-extrusion filament fabrication and FDM-based 3D printing. Wafer-scale 2D MoS₂ synthesized by nanoseed-initiated APCVD processes was integrated onto the 3D-printed PEEK through a polymer-assisted transferred, yielding MoS₂@PEEK. Under dual-wavelength irradiation, the MoS₂ enables dual phototherapy, involving 650 nm-mediated photodynamic therapy (PDT) and 808 nm-mediated photothermal therapy (PTT), for effective tumor ablation and antibacterial activity Simultaneously, controlled 808 nm-induced hyperthermia promotes vascularized bone regeneration. This integrated theragenerative platform simultaneously achieves oncologic eradication and functional bone repair within a single implant system. SupplementaryinformationNC.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Reviewers agreed at journal 06 May, 2026 Reviewers invited by journal 06 May, 2026 Editor assigned by journal 02 May, 2026 First submitted to journal 30 Apr, 2026 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-9575873","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":635642414,"identity":"c05e116a-2a40-4534-8d7a-70c49e3bc1de","order_by":0,"name":"Jong Hwa Seo","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hanyang University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jong","middleName":"Hwa","lastName":"Seo","suffix":""},{"id":635642415,"identity":"1ba41f41-3939-4da8-9e8c-168bdcae6f1f","order_by":1,"name":"In ho Choi","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"The Catholic University of Korea - Songsim Campus","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"In","middleName":"ho","lastName":"Choi","suffix":""},{"id":635642416,"identity":"69ba0efa-5e64-4a83-af04-57affc20f742","order_by":2,"name":"Hyun Lee","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Korea Institute of Industrial Technology","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Hyun","middleName":"","lastName":"Lee","suffix":""},{"id":635642417,"identity":"1d5c8d8e-2c1c-4d23-a3e3-4f642d46c481","order_by":3,"name":"Seojoon Bang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hanyang University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Seojoon","middleName":"","lastName":"Bang","suffix":""},{"id":635642418,"identity":"7f8976d6-6c07-444a-b81e-17691bc6937a","order_by":4,"name":"Hyeong Seok Kang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hanyang University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Hyeong","middleName":"Seok","lastName":"Kang","suffix":""},{"id":635642419,"identity":"dc441b61-0010-4f31-880c-bda594a94468","order_by":5,"name":"Chan Ho Moon","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hanyang University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Chan","middleName":"Ho","lastName":"Moon","suffix":""},{"id":635642420,"identity":"f8486f00-5389-45dd-ae70-2ee3ffc1ba53","order_by":6,"name":"Ju Yeong Gwon","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hanyang University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ju","middleName":"Yeong","lastName":"Gwon","suffix":""},{"id":635642421,"identity":"ea22dfd2-4e5e-4509-8e54-851643d576b9","order_by":7,"name":"Nayoung Lee","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hanyang University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Nayoung","middleName":"","lastName":"Lee","suffix":""},{"id":635642422,"identity":"ceb97e96-680c-4ceb-b86a-4c5f9a7d00a0","order_by":8,"name":"Geonwoo Kim","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hanyang University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Geonwoo","middleName":"","lastName":"Kim","suffix":""},{"id":635642423,"identity":"41b872f9-0f46-4958-bf85-254f35eff182","order_by":9,"name":"Youn Ha Cho","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"The Catholic University of Korea - Songsim Campus","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Youn","middleName":"Ha","lastName":"Cho","suffix":""},{"id":635642424,"identity":"668eb954-4528-44ce-bd2b-469e965fed27","order_by":10,"name":"Se Jin Choi","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"The Catholic University of Korea - Songsim Campus","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Se","middleName":"Jin","lastName":"Choi","suffix":""},{"id":635642425,"identity":"c51ef62e-a853-457c-82ff-0242b679aea4","order_by":11,"name":"Hyo Jin Joo","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"The Catholic University of Korea - Songsim Campus","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Hyo","middleName":"Jin","lastName":"Joo","suffix":""},{"id":635642426,"identity":"e4df0bfd-8ec1-4fbc-8dfc-031c998a9fb1","order_by":12,"name":"Ji Hye Kim","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"The Catholic University of Korea - Songsim Campus","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ji","middleName":"Hye","lastName":"Kim","suffix":""},{"id":635642427,"identity":"0a27e99b-03fe-4f0e-9c24-b5b96c4b3676","order_by":13,"name":"Eun Saem Song","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"The Catholic University of Korea - Songsim Campus","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Eun","middleName":"Saem","lastName":"Song","suffix":""},{"id":635642428,"identity":"c69ab935-f708-4bcb-a71e-1c78e4dc1f80","order_by":14,"name":"Jihoon Kim","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Seoul National University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jihoon","middleName":"","lastName":"Kim","suffix":""},{"id":635642429,"identity":"58d85efb-6bc2-4730-b804-d340a17ad281","order_by":15,"name":"Dongjun Kim","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Seoul National University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Dongjun","middleName":"","lastName":"Kim","suffix":""},{"id":635642430,"identity":"557b7bf5-c172-405c-b413-01ed617bb3e1","order_by":16,"name":"Sungsu Kang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Chicago College","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Sungsu","middleName":"","lastName":"Kang","suffix":""},{"id":635642431,"identity":"42067fb0-822d-4341-ae3b-37835a906628","order_by":17,"name":"Dong Yun Lee","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hanyang University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Dong","middleName":"Yun","lastName":"Lee","suffix":""},{"id":635642432,"identity":"bf0013d1-04c1-45f4-a98d-63296d650c44","order_by":18,"name":"Donghyun Lim","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hanyang University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Donghyun","middleName":"","lastName":"Lim","suffix":""},{"id":635642433,"identity":"232d3d9f-0085-4253-8a81-844a84ee1999","order_by":19,"name":"Kisuk Yang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Incheon National University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Kisuk","middleName":"","lastName":"Yang","suffix":""},{"id":635642434,"identity":"76a547db-ed7c-4e4c-abf6-c4554e53357a","order_by":20,"name":"Gi Doo Cha","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Chung-Ang University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Gi","middleName":"Doo","lastName":"Cha","suffix":""},{"id":635642435,"identity":"9b76247c-9892-4199-8127-ab4db4233d4e","order_by":21,"name":"Soo-Hong Lee","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Dongguk University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Soo-Hong","middleName":"","lastName":"Lee","suffix":""},{"id":635642436,"identity":"b0e8b663-d3cc-4990-9410-94d4f4110d73","order_by":22,"name":"Jungwon Park","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Seoul National University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jungwon","middleName":"","lastName":"Park","suffix":""},{"id":635642437,"identity":"2f10743d-aaa3-4dcb-9abd-88ffbe5728fb","order_by":23,"name":"Minho Kang","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1342-0077","institution":"The Catholic University of Korea - Songsim Campus","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Minho","middleName":"","lastName":"Kang","suffix":""},{"id":635642438,"identity":"62921bb2-3b46-4615-b184-c3f33e3bbc62","order_by":24,"name":"Hyun-Do Jung","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8632-7431","institution":"Hanyang University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Hyun-Do","middleName":"","lastName":"Jung","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-04-30 10:36:39","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9575873/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9575873/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":109332452,"identity":"5e1076b3-9ceb-4162-bf2d-81203cf0a6ad","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-15 16:18:18","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":1423489,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDual photo-responsive photothermal and photodynamic performance of PEEK and MoS\u003c/strong\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e@PEEK.\u003c/strong\u003e (a) Infrared thermal images of PEEK and (b) MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK under 808 nm NIR irradiation at different power densities and irradiation times. (c) Temperature elevation profiles as a function of irradiation time under various 808 nm power densities. (d) Maximum equilibrium temperatures achieved at different 808 nm power densities. (e) Consecutive heating-cooling cycles under repeated 808 nm irradiation for photothermal stability and reproducibility. (f) Time-dependent singlet oxygen generation evaluated by SOSG fluorescence intensity under 650 nm irradiation.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9575873/v1/fbc64bbe5e5f592ecbf98d2f.png"},{"id":109332454,"identity":"87f20e1f-fe79-4f76-aca8-73df219b92d1","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-15 16:18:18","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":726793,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDual photo-responsive photothermal and photodynamic performance of PEEK and MoS\u003c/strong\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e@PEEK.\u003c/strong\u003e (a) Infrared thermal images of PEEK and (b) MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK under 808 nm NIR irradiation at different power densities and irradiation times. (c) Temperature elevation profiles as a function of irradiation time under various 808 nm power densities. (d) Maximum equilibrium temperatures achieved at different 808 nm power densities. (e) Consecutive heating-cooling cycles under repeated 808 nm irradiation for photothermal stability and reproducibility. (f) Time-dependent singlet oxygen generation evaluated by SOSG fluorescence intensity under 650 nm irradiation.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9575873/v1/26d95e55dfb184ad3fa1d09c.png"},{"id":109332456,"identity":"c746d475-304e-4e61-b044-945deba6649b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-15 16:18:18","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":1393997,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSynergistic dual-phototherapeutic anticancer and antibacterial effects of MoS\u003c/strong\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e@PEEK.\u003c/strong\u003e (a) Live and dead staining fluorescence images of cancer cells after 3 days of culturing on different 3D-printed PEEK scaffolds. (b) Quantitative analysis of cell viability determined by CCK-8 assay at day 1 and 3 of culture (n = 3). Representative SEM images of bacterial morphology on the 3D-printed PEEK scaffolds against (c) \u003cem\u003eE. coli \u003c/em\u003eand (d) \u003cem\u003eS. aureus\u003c/em\u003e, respectively. Fluorescence microscopy images of live and dead staining for (e) \u003cem\u003eE. coli \u003c/em\u003eand (f) \u003cem\u003eS. aureus\u003c/em\u003e, respectively. Representative colony formation images and corresponding quantitative analysis of average colony numbers for (g) \u003cem\u003eE. coli \u003c/em\u003eand (h) \u003cem\u003eS. aureus \u003c/em\u003e(n = 3). Data are shown as mean ± standard deviation (SD). Normality was tested using the Shapiro-Wilk method, and one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s HSD post hoc analysis was applied, with significance at *p\u0026lt;0.05, **p\u0026lt;0.01, ***p\u0026lt;0.005, and ****p\u0026lt;0.001.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9575873/v1/a0a8ec8245c557d1a39667bc.png"},{"id":109332457,"identity":"0183f6d1-f84c-4c10-993b-d1169b61d102","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-15 16:18:18","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":1735796,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eIn vitro\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e osteogenic and angiogenic responses on MoS\u003c/strong\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e@PEEK under NIR-induced mild hyperthermia.\u003c/strong\u003e (a) Representative SEM and DAPI/Phalloidin-stained fluorescence images of pre-osteoblasts adhesion on different 3D-printed PEEK specimens after 6 hours of culture. (b) Cell proliferation rate assessed by CCK-8 assay (n = 3). (c) Alkaline phosphatase (ALP) and (d) Alizarin Red S (ARS) staining to assess differentiation after 7 and 14 days of culture (n = 3). (e) Representative SEM and DAPI/Phalloidin-stained fluorescence images of endothelial cells adhesion on different 3D-printed PEEK specimens after 1 day of culture. (f) Quantitative analysis of endothelial cell adhesion coverage based on fluorescence imaging (n = 3). (g) Quantification of cell spreading area determined from SEM images (n = 3). (h) Cell proliferation rate assessed by CCK-8 assay (n = 3). Data are shown as mean ± standard deviation (SD). Normality was tested using the Shapiro-Wilk method, and one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s HSD post hoc analysis was applied. For non-normally distributed data, statistical analysis was performed using the Kruskal-Wallis H test followed by pairwise comparisons with the Mann-Whitney U test, with significance at *p\u0026lt;0.05, **p\u0026lt;0.01, ***p\u0026lt;0.005, and ****p\u0026lt;0.001.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9575873/v1/c89216841365df554df66383.png"},{"id":109405510,"identity":"31fb09b3-0a5c-4cc6-a825-e9f325941365","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-17 13:18:36","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":5617255,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9575873/v1/e24dcda9-a4c6-4d0d-979c-8c7af8169792.pdf"},{"id":109405609,"identity":"49569e9a-e272-4641-9c31-2cf81b82f0db","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-17 13:19:22","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":1635368,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eScheme 1. Schematic illustration of the fabrication of a 2D MoS₂-conformal 3D-printed PEEK scaffold (MoS\u003c/strong\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e@PEEK) and its application as a dual photo-responsive theragenerative platform for osteosarcoma defect treatment. \u003c/strong\u003ePatient-specific PEEK scaffolds were fabricated via melt-extrusion filament fabrication and FDM-based 3D printing. Wafer-scale 2D MoS₂ synthesized by nanoseed-initiated APCVD processes was integrated onto the 3D-printed PEEK through a polymer-assisted transferred, yielding MoS₂@PEEK. Under dual-wavelength irradiation, the MoS₂ enables dual phototherapy, involving 650 nm-mediated photodynamic therapy (PDT) and 808 nm-mediated photothermal therapy (PTT), for effective tumor ablation and antibacterial activity Simultaneously, controlled 808 nm-induced hyperthermia promotes vascularized bone regeneration. This integrated theragenerative platform simultaneously achieves oncologic eradication and functional bone repair within a single implant system.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9575873/v1/2fef871bc1760d884d2ac144.png"},{"id":109332455,"identity":"727b7eec-5b1d-4ffa-ab50-b7101d33b361","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-15 16:18:18","extension":"docx","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":26753256,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"SupplementaryinformationNC.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9575873/v1/5ffe996f3ccbdb4795eea1ff.docx"}],"financialInterests":"","formattedTitle":"2D MoS2-Conformal 3D-Printed Platform for Dual Phototherapy and Bone Regeneration","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eOsteosarcoma is a malignant bone tumor that primarily affects pediatric, and adolescents populations because of its aggressive local infiltration and high susceptibility to early systemic metastasis, requiring advanced therapeutic treatments beyond conventional strategies [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e]. Wide surgical resection is one of the most commonly used treatment approaches, however, it often results in extensive postoperative bone defects [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e], which can cause a long-term functional disorder and increase the risk of reconstructive failure [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e]. In addition, post-resectional implant integration carries several clinical risks [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e]. The surgical site may be vulnerable to bacterial infection due to reduced blood flow, a weakened immune response, and excessive inflammation [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e]. Notably, delayed bone regeneration and dead space facilitate biofilm maturation leading to chronic infection and implant failure [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e]. In addition, the potential for minimal residual disease represents a critical oncological challenge, which increases the risk of local recurrence, imposing severe burden on patients and impacting their long-term quality of life [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e]. Furthermore, because bone defect geometries vary significantly between patients following osteosarcoma resection, there is a critical need for patient-specific implant designs tailored to these individual defect characteristics [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e]. Consequently, following osteosarcoma resection, there is a need to develop patient-specific, bone implants that can simultaneously achieve tumor control and bone regeneration while preventing infection and recurrence.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePolyetheretherketone (PEEK) has attracted considerable attention as a candidate material for orthopedic implants owing to its bone-like elastic modulus, excellent mechanical strength, chemical stability and relatively low imaging artifacts in computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR6 CR7 CR8\" citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e]. In particular, PEEK can mitigate stress shielding phenomenon effectively compared with conventional metallic implants due to its similar elastic modulus with that of the bone, while possessing excellent durability ensuring long-term stability \u003cem\u003ein-vivo\u003c/em\u003e [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR5\" citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e]. Furthermore, although PEEK is a challenging material for additive manufacturing due to its high melting temperature, successful 3D printing of PEEK enables patient-specific geometries tailored to complex defect while maintaining superior mechanical integrity [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e]. By precisely controlling pore architecture including porosity, pore size and interconnectivity, mechanical integrity and biological fixation can be optimized, facilitating tissue ingrowth for excellent load-bearing performance [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e]. However, PEEK is a representative bioinert material with limited capacity to facilitate cellular adhesion and proliferation. The deficiency in surface bioactivity results in lack of osseointegration and osteogenesis, compromising initial stability of the bone implant and delaying tissue regeneration [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR5\" citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e]. Consequently, strategies for surface functionalization to enhance bioactivity is essential for maximizing the clinical performance of PEEK-based orthopedic implants.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMolybdenum disulfide (MoS₂), a transition metal dichalcogenides (TMDCs), is gaining attention as a functional material in the biomedical field due to its high surface area, defect rich surfaces including sulfur vacancies and edge sites with oxygen containing surface species such as MoOx and Mo-OH which can collectively enhance biocompatibility, with cellular adhesion, proliferation and differentiation [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR14 CR15 CR16 CR17 CR18 CR19\" citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e]. In addition, MoS₂ exhibits excellent long term mechanical and chemical stability, making it an ideal candidate for biomedical implant surface functionalization [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e]. Notably, MoS₂ exhibits dual phototherapeutic performance, inducing both photothermal therapy (PTT) and photodynamic therapy (PDT) effects in response to external light irradiation [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e]. Compared to conventional pharmacological interventions, this light-mediated approach offers a non-invasive, localized antimicrobial and anticancer treatment, which can minimize damage to healthy tissue and systemic side effects while accelerating tissue regeneration [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e]. PTT can selectively damage tumor cells and bacteria by localized hyperthermia through photothermal conversion under near-infrared irradiation (NIR) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e]. PDT generates reactive oxygen species (ROS) upon light irradiation, thereby inducing cytotoxicity and antibacterial performances [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e]. However, the therapeutic efficacy of PTT or PDT monotherapy may be limited. Therefore, synergizing these two phototherapies can significantly enhance therapeutic efficacy and address heterogeneity within tumor and infection microenvironments [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e]. Furthermore, numerous studies have reported that mild photothermal stimulation promotes not only osteogenesis but also accelerate angiogenesis [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e]. Consequently, precisely controlled photo-stimulation represents a potent strategy to achieve tumor ablation and infection prophylaxis, while simultaneously promoting vascularized bone regeneration.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e can be synthesized by mechanical exfoliation, chemical exfoliation, hydrothermal/solvothermal synthesis, metal organic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD), and atmospheric pressure chemical vapor deposition (APCVD) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR20\" citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e]. However, these methods often struggle to obtain highly crystalline MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e, require prolonged synthesis time, require high costs, pose health, and environmental risks. Notably, these methods have limitations in precisely controlling the layer thickness and uniformity [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e]. To overcome these limitations, we utilized the nanoseed-initiated APCVD process, which enables wafer-scale synthesis of 2D monolayer MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e with reducing potential health and environment risks, with high crystallinity and uniformity over a wide area in a relatively short time, offering excellent reproducibility and scalability. Furthermore, by applying a polymer-assisted transfer method, MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e can be conformally integrated onto the large surface area of the substrate with complex morphologies. This approach enables functionalization of heat-sensitive polymers such as PEEK which cannot withstand high temperature of CVD or hydrothermal process for direct MoS₂ growth, and additionally allows integration onto the irregular surface of 3D scaffolds, thereby significantly enhancing the bioactivity of 3D-printed PEEK.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn this study, we applied MoO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e nanoseed-initiated APCVD to uniformly synthesize a wafer-scale 2D monolayer MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e with high crystallinity, which subsequently integrated onto the surface of 3D-printed PEEK by a polymer assisted transfer technique. This process developed 3D-printed PEEK functionalized with 2D MoS₂ termed as MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK. MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK features a structure optimized for the patient specific defects, and enhanced osteogenesis and angiogenesis. Moreover, MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK exhibits dual phototherapeutic efficacy under dual-wavelength irradiation at 808 and 650 nm, which induces PTT and PDT responses, respectively. This synergistic approach significantly mitigates the risk of postoperative bacterial infection and tumor recurrence while simultaneously accelerating osteogenesis and angiogenesis through a pro-regenerative microenvironment (Scheme \u003cspan refid=\"Sch1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e]. Consequently, by integrating patient specific bone reconstruction and localized dual phototherapy into a single implant, this platform represents a next-generation theragenerative strategy to overcome critical challenges that may arise during implant placement and tissue reconstruction following osteosarcoma resection.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Materials and methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1. Materials\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003ePolyetheretherketone (PEEK) granule, 6 mm nominal granule size, weight 200 g, PEEK powder, mean particle size 50 \u0026micro;m, weight 100 g, ammonium heptamolybdate powder, ethyl alcohol (EtOH, 99%), acetone (99%), isopropyl alcohol (IPA, 99%), polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP, molecular weight: 40,000), NaCl powder (99%), SiC sandpapers, polystyrene (PS, molecular weight: 280,000), toluene (99.8%), antibiotic\u0026ndash;antimycotic (AA), paraformaldehyde (4%), Triton X-100, bovine serum albumin (BSA), glutaraldehyde, 1,1,1,3,3,3-hexamethyldisilazane, trypsin EDTA solution, and alizarin red S (ARS), sodium phosphate, cetylpyridinium chloride, p-Nitrophenyl Phosphate (pNPP) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (USA). Sapphire wafer was obtained from 4science (Korea). Argon gas (99.999%, Ar), and Nitrogen gas (99.99%, N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e) were purchased from DAEHAN SPECIAL GAS Co., LTD (Korea). 70% EtOH, and methyl alcohol were purchased from DAEJUNG (Korea). Endothelial cell basal medium-2 (EBM) and endothelial cell growth kit (EGM) were obtained from Lonza (Switzerland). Dulbecco\u0026rsquo;s modified Eagle\u0026rsquo;s medium (DMEM), Dulbecco's Phosphate-Buffered Saline (DPBS), and alpha minimum essential medium (α-MEM) were purchased from Welgene (Korea). Fetal bovine serum (FBS) was obtained from Gibco (USA). Singlet oxygen sensor green (SOSG) kit, Live/Dead staining kit (L3224), 4\u0026prime;,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI), CyQUANT cell proliferation assay kit (C7026), calcein AM, and live and dead bacterial viability kit (L7012) were obtained from Invitrogen (USA). CCK cell viability assay kit (D-Plus) was purchased from Dongin-LS (Korea). Alexa Fluor\u0026reg; 555 phalloidin was purchased from Molecular Probes (USA). BCA protein assay kit was obtained from Thermo Fisher (USA).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2. Fabrication of the PEEK filament and 3D-Printed PEEK scaffolds\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor the manufacture of PEEK filament, PEEK was mixed in two forms-granules and powder-at a ratio of 80 vol% granules to 20 vol% powder by volume. This composition was designed to maintain the stable melt viscosity of the granule base while allowing the powder to effectively fill the voids between the granules, thereby improving flowability and enhancing extrusion stability. Subsequently, all mixed raw materials were dried in a vacuum oven at 80\u0026deg;C for 12 h to remove moisture. The dried mixture was extruded at 400\u0026deg;C using filament manufacturing equipment (3devo B.V., Netherlands), resulting in the production of uniform filaments with a diameter of 1.56\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.01 mm. The manufactured filament was used for 3D printing via a customized FDM system. Printing was performed under the following conditions: nozzle temperature 440\u0026deg;C, bed temperature 160\u0026deg;C, chamber temperature 160\u0026deg;C, printing speed 20 mm/s, and layer thickness 200 \u0026micro;m. Under these conditions, various structural bodies were printed to realize patient-specific shapes based on diverse CAD designs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.3. Preparation of MoO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e Precursor Solution\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e nanoparticle was synthesized by hydrothermal synthesis. 150 mg of Ammonium heptamolybdate powder was dissolved in 22 mL of deionized (DI) wafer. And 10 mL of EtOH was added to the solution. After 500 mg of PVP powder was dissolved in the solution. Subsequently mixture was stirred for 30 min. The solution was transferred into Teflon-lined stainless-steel autoclave (SCIST, Korea) and heat-treated at 180 ℃ for 16 h in a muffle furnace. After the reaction, autoclave was rapidly cooled in 4 ℃ water. The solution was then centrifuged by 23,000 G, and supernatant was removed. The precipitate was washed three times with acetone and EtOH, respectively, followed by drying at 80 ℃ overnight to prepare MoO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e nanoparticle. To prepare MoO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e precursor solution, 15.2 mg of MoO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e nanoparticle precursor was dispersed in 30 mL of ethanol with uniform dispersion by sonication for 30 min. Then, 1.2 mL of MoO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e solution was mixed with 0.1 mL of ethanol and 26 \u0026micro;L of 0.1 M NaCl in methanol, followed by sonication for 10 min.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.4. 2D MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e Synthesis via Nanoseed-Initiated APCVD\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSapphire wafer was pretreated at 1000 ℃ for 4 h in a muffle furnace to remove surface impurities. The pretreated wafer was sequentially washed by sonication in acetone and EtOH for 10 min each, respectively. Afterwards, wafer was rinsed with IPA and dried by N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e gas blowing. After cleaning process, 0.8 mL of MoO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e precursor solution was drop-cast on the wafer and uniformly dispersed by spin coating at 3,000 rpm for 60 s. The MoO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e dispersed wafer and sulfur powder were loaded in separate zones within CVD chamber. Distance between the samples was 35 cm. The MoO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e dispersed wafer was heated to 650 ℃ for 45 min and maintained at that temperature for 30 min, and sulfur powder was maintained at 20 ℃ for 35 min, then heated to 140 ℃ for 10 min and held at that temperature for 30 min, respectively, under Ar atmosphere with flow rate of 500 sccm. After the heating process, the samples were cooled to room temperature.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.5. Polymer Assisted Transfer of MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e onto 3D-Printed PEEK Scaffolds\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe PEEK was polished in sequence with 800, 1,000, 2,000, 3,000 grits SiC sandpaper. Polished PEEK was washed sequentially by ethanol and DI water with sonication for 5 min each. A polymer assisted transfer method was used to transfer MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e onto PEEK surface. For the supporting polymer, 9 g of PS powder was dissolved in 100 mL of toluene overnight. The PS solution was spin coated onto MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e deposited wafer at 3,000 rpm for 60 s and subsequently heat-treated at 90 ℃ for 5 min on a hot plate to completely dry the solvent. The PS coated MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e wafer was cut into size of the PEEK substrate and immersed in DI water. Due to the hydrophobic nature of both MoS₂ and PS, water penetrates the interface between MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e and the wafer, separating the PS/MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e layer from the wafer and floating on the water surface. The floating film was carefully transferred onto PEEK substrate. Then residual water between MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e and PEEK was removed using filter paper and to ensure complete removal of the water, the sample was heat-treated at 90 ℃ for 5 min. The PS was eliminated by immersing the sample in toluene for 1 h and the sample was rinsed with acetone and dried at room temperature for 30 min. The resulting MoS₂ transferred PEEK substrate is hereafter referred to as MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.6. Characterization of MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e grown wafer and MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK.\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe morphology, nanostructure and atomic structure of the materials were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM, HITACHI S-4800, Japan) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM, JEOL Ltd, JEM-2100F, Japan), equipped with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX). To investigate the cross-sectional morphology, a TEM specimen was prepared by focused ion beam milling (FIB) using a dual-beam SEM (ZEISS AURIGA, Germany), followed by TEM imaging. The surface chemistry of products was collected by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS, AXIS SUPRA, ESCA II, UK). X-ray diffraction (XRD, Rigaku MiniFlex600, Japan) patterns were recorded, diffractometer using Cu Kα radiation (λ\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.5405 \u0026Aring;) with the 2θ range of 20\u0026ndash;75\u0026deg; with an interval of 0.02\u0026deg;. Additionally, Raman spectra were collected using aberration-corrected spectrometer operated with 532 nm laser (NOST, HEDA, Korea).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.7. The Photothermal and Photodynamic Ability of the MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK scaffold\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe photothermal and photodynamic characteristics of the scaffold were assessed utilizing 808 nm and 650 nm NIR lasers (OCLA; AMI, Korea), respectively. The 3D-printed scaffold, with dimensions of 10 \u0026times; 10 \u0026times; 2 mm\u0026sup3;, was positioned within a mold filled with DPBS, measuring 20 \u0026times; 20 \u0026times; 4 mm\u0026sup3;, to replicate an \u003cem\u003ein vitro\u003c/em\u003e environment. Photothermal properties were evaluated by monitoring temperature variations over time under irradiation at power intensities of 1, 2, and 3 W cm⁻\u0026sup2; using the 808 nm laser. Photodynamic properties were examined by assessing the time-dependent production of singlet oxygen (\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003eO₂) under continuous irradiation with a 650 nm laser (100 mW). During irradiation, temperature changes were recorded in real-time using a thermal imaging camera (FLIR E54; FLIR Systems Inc., USA), and \u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003eO₂ generation was quantified employing the SOSG assay. SOSG fluorescence was measured with a hybrid multi-mode reader (Synergy H1, BioTek, USA) at an excitation wavelength of 390 nm and an emission wavelength of 520 nm. The final fluorescence values were obtained by subtracting the signal of the control group and subsequently normalizing the data for analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.8. \u003cem\u003eIn vitro\u003c/em\u003e Dual-Phototherapeutic Anticancer Performance of MoS₂@PEEK scaffolds\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eOsteosarcoma cells (MG63; CRL-1427, ATCC, USA) were seeded onto sterilized PEEK and MoS₂@PEEK scaffolds (10 \u0026times; 10 \u0026times; 2 mm\u0026sup3;) at a density of 2 \u0026times; 10⁴ cells mL⁻\u0026sup1; following treatment with 70% ethanol and ultraviolet (UV) irradiation. The cells were subsequently cultured under standard conditions in DMEM supplemented with 10% FBS and 1% AA. After a 24 h incubation period to facilitate cell attachment and stabilization, NIR irradiation was conducted. Specifically, a 650 nm laser was applied at 100 mW output for 3 min, followed by an 808 nm laser at an output density of 2 W cm⁻\u0026sup2; for 3 min. Cell viability was then qualitatively assessed using fluorescent staining with a Live/Dead staining kit and quantitatively analyzed using a CCK-8 assay. Fluorescence images were acquired using a fluorescence microscope (ECLIPS Ti2; Nikon, Japan). Cells were stained to indicate live and dead states with Calcein AM and Ethidium homodimer-1, respectively.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.9. \u003cem\u003eIn vitro\u003c/em\u003e Dual-Phototherapeutic Antibacterial Effect of MoS₂@PEEK scaffolds\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eGram-negative \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (\u003cem\u003eE. coli\u003c/em\u003e; ATCC 8739, Rockville, MD, USA) and gram-positive \u003cem\u003eStaphylococcus aureus\u003c/em\u003e (\u003cem\u003eS. aureus\u003c/em\u003e; ATCC 6538, Rockville, MD, USA) were employed to assess the NIR-responsive dual phototherapeutic antibacterial efficacy of the theragenerative MoS₂@PEEK platform. Each bacterial strain was cultured for 24 h by inoculating 50 \u0026micro;L of stock solution into 3 mL of LB broth. Subsequently, scaffolds measuring 10 \u0026times; 10 \u0026times; 2 mm\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e, sterilized with 70% ethanol and UV irradiation, were placed in a 24-well plate. Suspensions of \u003cem\u003eE. coli\u003c/em\u003e (1 \u0026times; 10\u0026sup3; CFU mL⁻\u0026sup1;) and \u003cem\u003eS. aureus\u003c/em\u003e (1 \u0026times; 10⁴ CFU mL⁻\u0026sup1;), each 60 \u0026micro;L, were seeded onto the respective specimens. Following a 4 h incubation period to facilitate bacterial attachment, NIR laser irradiation was conducted. PDT was executed using a 650 nm laser at 100 mW for 3 minutes, while photothermal therapy PTT was performed using an 808 nm laser at 2 W cm⁻\u0026sup2; for 3 minutes. Immediately post-NIR irradiation, the specimens were washed twice with DPBS and fixed with 2.5% glutaraldehyde to observe bacterial morphological changes. A stepwise dehydration process was then conducted using 70%, 90%, and 100% ethanol, followed by treatment with 1,1,1,3,3,3-hexamethyldisilazane, and analysis was performed using FE-SEM. Bacterial viability was assessed using a live/dead bacterial viability kit, with SYTO 9 and propidium iodide applied to each specimen and allowed to react for 15 min in the dark condition, followed by qualitative analysis using a fluorescence microscope. For quantitative evaluation, post-laser irradiation, the specimens were further incubated for 6 hours at 37\u0026deg;C and 150 rpm. The specimens were then washed with PBS, transferred into 3 mL of LB broth, and the attached bacteria were detached by vigorous vortexing for 1 min. The recovered bacterial suspension was serially diluted tenfold up to 10\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e times and subsequently plated onto LB agar plates. After 24 h of incubation at 37\u0026deg;C, the number of colonies formed was counted, and the average number of colonies was quantified based on high-resolution images.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.10. \u003cem\u003eIn vitro\u003c/em\u003e NIR-Responsive Osteo- Angiogenesis of MoS₂@PEEK scaffolds\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe degree of osteogenesis and angiogenesis were analyzed using pre-osteoblast cells (MC3T3-E1; CRL-2593, ATCC, USA), and human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs; CRL-1730, ATCC, USA), respectibely. MC3T3-E1 cells and HUVECs were cultured in α-MEM, and EBM supplemented with EGM bullet kit, respectively. To observe the cell adhesion behavior in response to the activated surface characteristics of MoS₂ and NIR stimuli, fluorescence images were obtained via fluorescence microscopy, and additional analyses were conducted using FE-SEM. For fluorescence staining, cells were seeded on specimens (10 \u0026times; 10 \u0026times; 2 mm\u0026sup3;) at a density of 3 \u0026times; 10⁴ cells mL⁻\u0026sup1;, fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde, and immersed in 0.1% Triton X-100 and 3% BSA solutions. The nuclei and cytoplasm of the cells were then stained with DAPI and phalloidin, respectively. For quantitative analysis of cell adhesion, cell density based on fluorescence images and cytoplasmic area per cell based on FE-SEM images were each analyzed. Cell proliferation was assessed using the CCK-8 assay; after seeding at a density of 2 \u0026times; 10⁴ cells mL⁻\u0026sup1; and allowing an overnight stabilization period, absorbance at 450 nm was measured using a multi-mode reader at 1 and 3 days. Cell differentiation was analyzed through ARS staining and ALP activity assay. For ARS staining, the specimens were washed twice with DPBS, fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde, and reacted with ARS solution under dark conditions, followed by washing with DW and drying. The degree of mineralization was then photographed using a high-resolution camera. For quantitative analysis, the specimens washed with DW were reacted with 10% cetylpyridinium chloride in 10 mM sodium phosphate (pH 7.0), and absorbance at 560 nm was measured using a multi-mode reader. For the ALP activity assay, cells were collected by trypsin EDTA treatment, then treated with 0.1% Triton X-100 and vortexed, followed by four cycles of freezing at -70\u0026deg;C and thawing at 37\u0026deg;C for 5 minutes each. The samples were then centrifuged at 14,000 rpm and 4\u0026deg;C for 20 minutes to separate the supernatant, and samples were prepared according to consistent protein amounts determined by BCA protein quantification. Next, pNPP was dispensed, reacted at 37\u0026deg;C for 1 hour, and absorbance at 405 nm was measured using a multi-mode reader.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.11. Statistical Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe quantitative experimental results are expressed as the mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;standard deviation, derived from at least three replicates for each group. The data analysis was conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics 26 (IBM, Armonk, USA). To determine statistical significance, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Tukey\u0026rsquo;s post hoc test, the Kruskal\u0026ndash;Wallis H test, and the Mann-Whitney U test with pairwise comparisons were employed. The p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant, with significance levels indicated as follows: *p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05, **p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01, ***p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.005, and ****p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Results and Discussion","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1. Fabrication of 3D-printed PEEK Scaffold\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eRecently, polyetheretherketone (PEEK)-based scaffolds have emerged as promising biomaterials in the field of orthopedics, owing to their bone-mimetic mechanical properties and exceptional \u003cem\u003ein vivo\u003c/em\u003e stability arising from their inherent chemical inertness [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR24\" citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e]. Nevertheless, conventional PEEK scaffolds have a limitation of failing to adequately meet complex biological requirements such as suppressing cancer recurrence, managing perioperative bacterial infections, and accelerating vascularization and bone regeneration [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e]. These biological limitations not only reduce the efficiency of tissue reconstruction but also increase the risk of long-term complications, potentially leading to permanent functional impairment [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e]. Specifically, for extensive and irregular defects formed after osteosarcoma resection, technical limitations exist in fabricating structures of the implant that simultaneously satisfy anatomical precision and mechanical compatibility. Therefore, PEEK scaffolds fabricated through 3D printing-based patient-specific structure must not only ensure precise geometric compatibility with the surrounding tissue but also be extended to simultaneously facilitate therapeutic treatment and tissue regeneration through integration with functional materials [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccordingly, this study proposes a strategy to enhance tissue-material interfacial interactions and induce functional reconstruction by integrating monolayer molybdenum disulfide (MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e) synthesized via MoO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e nanoseed-initiated atmospheric pressure chemical vapor deposition (APCVD), onto the surface of a 3D-printed PEEK scaffold. Notably, by exploiting the photo-responsivity of 2D MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e, we induced localized dual-phototherapeutic effects of combined photothermal (PTT) and photodynamic therapies (PDT), while simultaneously promoting tissue regeneration through the intrinsic bioactivity of MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e. Consequently, a 2D MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e-conformal 3D-printed PEEK based theragenerative platform was established, enabling simultaneous eradication of residual cancer cells and bacterial pathogens with accelerated vascularized osteogenesis, as illustrated in Scheme \u003cspan refid=\"Sch1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFirst, to achieve precise 3D-printed PEEK scaffolds, it is essential to manufacture PEEK filaments with uniform diameters and stable physical properties. However, melt-extruding PEEK into high quality filaments while preserving its inherent mechanical properties remains as a technically challenging task [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e]. To ensure the structural stability and printing precision of PEEK filaments, we employed a granule-powder blend of granules with a nominal size of 6 mm and powder with an average size of 50 \u0026micro;m at an 8:2 (vol%) ratio. While granules offer the advantage of excellent mechanical strength, their high strength and melting characteristics can hinder flowability during filament extrusion. In contrast, powder effectively fills interparticle voids, thereby enhancing flowability and ensuring extrusion stability. Utilizing this optimized blend, we successfully produced highly uniform filaments with a diameter of 1.56\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.01 mm by melt extrusion-based compression molding process. By applying the filaments, various structures were fabricated based on computer-aided design (CAD) models under printing conditions of 440\u0026deg;C (\u003cb\u003eFig. \u003cspan refid=\"MOESM1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eS1\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/b\u003e). Furthermore, to demonstrate the anatomical applicability and clinical scalability, several orthopedic devices traditionally made from metallic alloys including cranial patch, spinal cage, suture anchor, and bone plate, were 3D-printed with high anatomical precision, confirming the feasibility of patient-specific fabrication and its applicability to actual bone defect sites (\u003cb\u003eFig. S2\u003c/b\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2. Fabrication and Characterization of MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK scaffold\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoS₂, a member of the transition metal dichalcogenide (TMDC) family, has attracted considerable attention as a functional material for biomedical application owing to its high specific surface area, and superior interfacial reactivity arising from sulfur vacancies, edge defects, and surface-active species such as MoOₓ and Mo\u0026ndash;OH, which collectively contribute to its excellent cellular compatibility and adhesive properties [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e]. Furthermore, MoS₂ maintains excellent mechanical and chemical stability over prolonged periods while offering great potential as a next-generation biointerfacial material owing to its photo-responsive capabilities such as PTT and PDT [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e]. However, to translate these advantages into practical biomedical platforms, highly crystalline 2D MoS₂ with precisely controlled layer thickness over large-area substrates, must be reproducibly synthesized. In parallel, processing strategies are required to enable damage-free integration of MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e onto various substrates, particularly 3D scaffolds with complex geometries. To achieve large-area, highly crystalline 2D MoS₂, we employed a MoO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e nanoseed-initiated APCVD process. The as-synthesized 2D MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e was integrated onto 3D printed PEEK via polymer assisted transfer to yield the MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK platform (\u003cb\u003eFig. S3).\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBased on previous study, the MoO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e precursor was synthesized via a hydrothermal method [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e]. The crystallographic structure of the synthesized MoO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e precursor were validated by x-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis. The XRD patterns exhibited the characteristic peaks corresponding to the (100), (002), and (101) planes of MoO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e, confirming the successful synthesis of the highly crystalline MoO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e precursor (\u003cb\u003eFig. S4\u003c/b\u003e). The synthesis of highly crystalline nanoparticle precursor is a critical foundation for achieving highly crystalline MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e during the subsequent nanoseed-initiated APCVD process. This is because the highly crystalline MoO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e nanoparticles act as self-seeding templates, where the growth of the MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e layer is driven by strong crystallographic correlations and energetically preferred orientations, rather than simply replicating the crystal structure of MoO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e]. The synthesized MoO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e precursor was mixed with ethanol, methanol, and NaCl to prepare a MoO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e solution, which was uniformly dispersed onto the wafer by spin-coating. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) and energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDX) analyses were performed to examine whether the MoO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e particles were uniformly distributed on the prepared sapphire wafer (\u003cb\u003eFig. S5\u003c/b\u003e). The results showed that the MoO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e particles were uniformly distributed across wafer surface, suggesting the spatial homogeneity which is a critical factor in achieving uniform sulfurization and preventing non-uniform island coalescence or unnecessary local defects during nanoseed-initiated APCVD process [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSubsequently, sulfur powder was used as the sulfur source and MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e grown wafer was fabricated by nanoseed-initiated APCVD. As shown in \u003cb\u003eFig. S6\u003c/b\u003e, Optical images and Optical Microscopy (OM) analyses confirmed that MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e was uniformly grown across the entire large-area wafer (diameter of 2 inches). Such large-scale uniformity sample to sample variation, enhancing the reliability of subsequent biological evaluations [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR34\" citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e]. SEM and EDX analyses further confirmed that the MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e was uniformly grown across the entire wafer (\u003cb\u003eFig. S7\u003c/b\u003e). This indicates that sulfurization did not occur locally but proceeded uniformly across the entire wafer surface, thereby supporting the chemical homogeneity and reproducibility of the process. Transmission Electron Microscope (TEM) analysis revealed that the synthesized MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e grew in the morphology of triangular island (\u003cb\u003eFig. S8a\u003c/b\u003e), indicating a highly ordered crystalline structure rather than an amorphous phase [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e]. Notably, cross-sectional TEM analysis confirmed that the thickness of the synthesized MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e was approximately 6 \u0026Aring;, directly demonstrating the growth of monolayer MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e (\u003cb\u003eFig. S8b and c\u003c/b\u003e) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e]. The significance of the monolayer structure extends beyond its minimal thickness, it maximizes interfacial interactions with the substrate, exposes active surface sites to the external environment, and gives rise to properties that are distinct from those of bulk or few layer counterparts [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR19\" citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e]. Therefore, the monolayer and highly crystalline structures obtained in this study can be regarded as a key structural foundation for subsequent cell-material interactions, modulation of surface energy, and the photo-responsive functions. Raman analysis further supported these findings, showing characteristic Raman peaks of the MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e at 386 and 403 cm⁻\u0026sup1;. The 17 cm⁻\u0026sup1; peak separation confirms the formation of monolayer structure of MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e (\u003cb\u003eFig. S9a\u003c/b\u003e) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e]. Furthermore, Mo and S peaks were observed in the full XPS spectra of the MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e grown wafer (\u003cb\u003eFig. S9b\u003c/b\u003e), and Mo 3d5, Mo 3d3, S 2p3, and S 2p1 peaks were clearly identified in the high-resolution XPS spectra (\u003cb\u003eFig. S9c and d\u003c/b\u003e), indicating that the chemically stable 2D MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e phase was successfully synthesized without any physically adsorbed byproducts. Consequently, the nanoseed initiated APCVD process developed in this study can be an effective synthesis strategy to produce highly crystalline 2D monolayer MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e with uniform thickness on a large area.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSubsequently, the 2D monolayer MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e was transferred onto the 3D-printed PEEK using a polymer assisted transfer process, followed by the removal of polystyrene (PS) with toluene to obtain the MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK scaffold. This process offers the advantage of preserving the high crystalline monolayer characteristics achieved during the synthesis without structural damage, while ultimately enabling functional integration onto the surface of a biomedical scaffold. This demonstrates a higher level of technical completeness than conventional transfer methods such as wet transfer, electrochemical delamination, bubble transfer, and dry transfer [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e]. The surface characteristics including surface morphology, chemical structure of the fabricated MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK were evaluated. Optical images, SEM, and EDX analyses confirmed that MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e was uniformly transferred over a wide area of the 3D-printed PEEK surface (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003ea). This indicates that the transfer was achieved stably across the entire surface of the scaffold, rather than being confined to specific regions. In particular, 3D printed scaffolds may exhibit surface roughness, curvature, and microstructural inhomogeneities, uniform transfer on complex structure is particularly noteworthy from a process engineering perspective. Cross-sectional TEM analysis confirmed that the monolayer MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e with a thickness of approximately 6 \u0026Aring; was functionalized on the 3D-printed PEEK surface (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003eb \u003cb\u003eand c)\u003c/b\u003e, consistent with cross-sectional TEM image observed for the MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e grown wafer (\u003cb\u003eFig.S8b and c\u003c/b\u003e). This demonstrates that the transfer process 2D MoS₂was transferred onto the substrate while preserving the monolayer characteristics and structural integrity established during the synthesis. Raman analysis revealed the characteristic peaks of monolayer MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eat 384 and 403 cm\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e on the MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK surface, and the 19 cm\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e separation between the two peaks which suit the separation range of 17\u0026ndash;19 cm\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e of the monolayer MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e confirming the successful transfer of monolayer MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003ed). Furthermore, the uniformity of the transferred 2D MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e, Raman evaluation was performed at predetermined nine spots of MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK surface, and the characteristic peaks of monolayer MoS₂ were consistently observed in all regions (\u003cb\u003eFig. S10\u003c/b\u003e). The XPS analysis results also strongly supported this finding. Mo and S peaks, which were not observed in PEEK, were clearly identified in the full XPS spectra of MoS₂@PEEK (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003ee), and the high resolution XPS spectra revealed Mo 3d5, Mo 3d3, S 2p3, and S 2p1 peaks identical to those of the MoS₂ coated wafer (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003ef \u003cb\u003eand g\u003c/b\u003e). These results demonstrate that this transfer process is not limited to localized functionalization but can achieve a stable and reproducible uniform monolayer coating across the entire surface of the scaffold. This provides an important foundation for minimizing surface location dependent variations in cellular responses and ensuring uniform biological performance in future bio-scaffold applications. The integrated process of nanoseed-initiated APCVD growth, and polymer assisted transfer can be regarded as a coherent fabrication strategy for integrating highly crystalline 2D monolayer MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e onto the surface of a 3D polymer scaffold without structural damage. This level of process integration is particularly attractive because it demonstrates technical completeness that extends beyond simple material fabrication and is directly applicable to the design of tissue engineering scaffolds and next generation biointerfaces, representing a key methodology distinction of this study.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHydrophilicity of the surface was evaluated by measuring water contact angles of PEEK and MoS₂@PEEK showed that the contact angle of MoS₂@PEEK was higher than that of the PEEK (\u003cb\u003eFig. S11\u003c/b\u003e), showing that the introduction of MoS₂ increased surface hydrophobicity. Although hydrophobicity was increased which may be considered as adverse effect on cellular adhesion, despite its higher hydrophobicity MoS₂@PEEK exhibited enhanced cellular compatibility. This suggests that cell-material interactions are not determined solely by contact angle but rather arise from the combined effects of surface chemical composition, defect structures, charge distribution, interfacial reactivity, protein adsorption behavior, and nanoscale surface characteristics [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR33\" citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e]. In particular, the high specific surface area and exposed active sites of the monolayer MoS₂, together with sulfur vacancies, edge defects, and surface MoOₓ/Mo\u0026ndash;OH species, may have favorably modulated the interfacial interactions associated with initial protein adsorption and cell adhesion [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR18 CR19\" citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e]. In other words, the enhanced cytocompatibility observed in this study is more reasonably attributed to the biologically activated interface provided by the highly crystalline monolayer MoS₂, rather than being explained by the conventional interpretation that it simply depends on increased surface hydrophilicity. Furthermore, the monolayer MoS₂ synthesized in this study exhibits high crystallinity while retaining active surface sites, demonstrating the feasibility of designing surfaces that simultaneously satisfy structural stability and biological reactivity. This may provide a favorable foundation for broader biomedical application in the future, including photostimulation-based functionalization, regulation of cellular behavior, and induction of tissue regeneration.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.3. Photo-stimulated Photothermal and Photodynamic Performance of MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK Scaffolds\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003ePhotoresponsiveness acts as a precision control system based on external stimuli. It is a key characteristic that allows stimuli to be transmitted non-invasively into the tissues, enabling selective activation of treatment at specific sites and inducing functional expression only when necessary. This serves as a significant advantage over conventional drug-based therapies by minimizing off-target effects [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e37\u003c/span\u003e]. With the successful incorporation of 2D MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e onto the surface, the limitations of the biological functionality inherent in conventional PEEK scaffolds are effectively overcome. The introduction of a photoresponsive interface enables a transition from a simple scaffold to an active platform for promoting both therapy and regeneration. Therefore, the photoresponsiveness depending on the photo wavelength was systematically evaluated.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMonolayer MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e possesses a direct bandgap (~\u0026thinsp;1.8\u0026ndash;1.9 eV), which induces both efficient charge generation and surface reactions upon light irradiation. These electronic structural characteristics and high surface exposure provide the foundation for implementing PTT and PDT within a single platform [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e39\u003c/span\u003e]. When NIR irradiation at the 808 nm is applied, the electron energy is converted into lattice vibrations (phonons) rather than being emitted as light. The accumulation of these phonons leads to localized heat generation, resulting in a photothermal effect where light energy is converted into thermal energy [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e41\u003c/span\u003e]. In particular, the monolayer MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e structure induces a stable temperature rise due to the rapid transfer and diffusion of heat generated through its high surface-to-volume ratio and direct interfacial contact with the PEEK substrate [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e42\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e43\u003c/span\u003e]. In contrast, under light irradiation conditions in the 650 nm region (\u0026asymp;\u0026thinsp;1.91 eV), generated charges migrate to the surface before recombination, triggering oxidation-reduction reactions with surrounding oxygen and water molecules, which leads to the formation of reactive oxygen species (ROS). Since monolayer MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e has a structure in which all atoms are exposed at the surface, the number of reactive sites is maximized, and the density of edge sites and defects promotes charge transfer reactions. Furthermore, the short charge transport distance increases the probability of participation in surface reactions before recombination, thereby enhancing ROS generation efficiency [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e44\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e]. Under dual-wavelength irradiation at 808 nm and 650 nm, photothermal and photodynamic effects act complementarily, resulting in a synergistic therapeutic outcome. Consequently, wavelength-selective photoresponsiveness enables a precisely controllable combined therapeutic strategy even on a single-material basis, thereby directly enabling spatiotemporally controlled therapeutic functionality, providing the core principle by which the MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK scaffold functions as a light-induced theragenerative platform [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR47 CR48 CR49\" citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e46\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e50\u003c/span\u003e]. Accordingly, quantitative validation of the degree of photoresponsiveness and the irradiation intensity and duration conditions was performed.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo precisely control the photothermal effect, temperature changes were analyzed as a function of the irradiation intensity and duration of 808 nm NIR, and heat generation was evaluated while immersed in DPBS to simulate a tissue-like environment. As a result, temperature elevation was observed in both the 3D-printed PEEK and the MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK scaffolds, increasing regarding to NIR irradiation intensity and exposure time. However, while PEEK exhibited only a limited temperature rise even under 3 W/cm\u0026sup2; conditions, MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK showed a much higher photothermal conversion efficiency with increasing irradiation intensity and duration (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003ea and \u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003eb). Quantitative analysis revealed that a rapid temperature rise occurred within approximately 30 sec after NIR irradiation, followed by a gradual stabilization. Based on the maximum temperature after 3 min of irradiation, the temperature difference 0.76\u0026deg;C at 1 W/cm\u0026sup2; (PEEK: 25.65\u0026deg;C, MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK: 26.41\u0026deg;C), 7.32\u0026deg;C at 2 W/cm\u0026sup2; (PEEK 29.49\u0026deg;C, MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK 36.81\u0026deg;C), and 11.23\u0026deg;C at 3 W/cm\u0026sup2; (PEEK 37.08\u0026deg;C, MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK 48.31\u0026deg;C) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003ec and \u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003ed). These results are attributed to the fact that PEEK, as a polymer which lacks photoactive functional groups, has a very low light absorption coefficient. Thus, the incident light energy is not effectively converted into heat but is largely dissipated without significant thermal conversion. In contrast, in MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK, heat is continuously generated due to the repeated creation of photoexcited charges and phonon accumulation resulting from non-radiative recombination. Furthermore, the temperature rise was more pronounced because the heat generation rate remained higher than the heat loss rate during continuous light irradiation [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e51\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e52\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo verify the reproducibility of the photothermal effect, the on-off cycle was repeated three times under 808 nm irradiation conditions. As a result, a reproducible and significant photothermal effect was confirmed in MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK. Notably, under the 3 W/cm\u0026sup2; condition, complete cooling did not occur during the off interval due to excessive heat generation. Consequently, as the cycles were repeated, the degree of temperature rise tended to increase progressively due to the accumulated heat relative to the initial temperature (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003ee). Furthermore, when irradiated at 3 W/cm\u0026sup2; starting from an initial temperature of 25\u0026deg;C, the temperature of MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK rose to 48.31\u0026deg;C, representing an increase of approximately 23.31\u0026deg;C, which is a level capable of causing thermal damage to surrounding normal tissue. Therefore, an irradiation intensity of 2 W/cm\u0026sup2;, which induces a temperature rise of approximately 11.81\u0026deg;C, was established as the optimal condition for theragenerative application [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e53\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSubsequently, SOSG fluorescence analysis was performed to verify the potential for photodynamic therapy in the 650 nm wavelength range. The results showed that ROS was not generated generation was observed in PEEK, whereas a time-dependent increase in ROS generation was confirmed in MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003ef). This indicates that photodynamic therapy can be applied by controlling the irradiation time. Furthermore, to verify wavelength-dependent photoresponsiveness, temperature changes under 650 nm irradiation conditions were analyzed under 100 mW, 3 min irradiation conditions, and photothermal effect was occurred in either PEEK or MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK \u003cb\u003e(Fig. S12\u003c/b\u003e). Conversely, SOSG fluorescence analysis under 808 nm irradiation conditions revealed no ROS generation in either group (\u003cb\u003eFig. S13\u003c/b\u003e). In the 650 nm region, exciton-driven charge generation promotes surface redox reactions, whereas heat accumulation via non-radiative recombination remains limited. In contrast, in the 808 nm region, sub-bandgap excitation leads to rapid non-radiative recombination, resulting in efficient heat generation but insufficient charge transfer for ROS production. Consequently, this wavelength-selective photoresponsiveness clearly demonstrates that the MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK system can precisely control the therapeutic mode depending on external light stimulation conditions, providing a key basis for the design of a theragenerative platform capable of applying PTT and PDT both independently and in combination [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e54\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.4 \u003cem\u003eIn vitro\u003c/em\u003e Synergistic Dual-Phototherapeutic Antitumor Performance of MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK Scaffold\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFollowing osteosarcoma resection, there is a significant risk of recurrence due to residual cancer cells at the surgical site. In particular, residual cancer cells can lead to tumor recurrence by continuously proliferating and invading surrounding tissues and metastasizing, which is a major cause requiring additional surgical resection and anticancer therapy. Therefore, effective elimination of residual cancer cells is critical for preventing recurrence and improving therapeutic outcomes [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e55\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e56\u003c/span\u003e]. To address these issues, we introduced a treatment strategy utilizing external light stimulation based on the photoresponsive properties of 2D MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e. Specifically, we aimed to evaluate the synergistic therapeutic effects by applying PTT and PDT independently, as well as in combination as dual-phototherapy.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOsteosarcoma cells were seeded onto PEEK and MoS₂@PEEK scaffolds. The non-photo-responsive PEEK group was set as a negative control without photo-irradiation, while the MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK group was designated as both the positive control and phototherapy treatment group. Subsequently, MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK was irradiated with the light at wavelength of 650 nm (PDT), 808 nm (PTT), as well as under dual-phototherapeutic conditions involving sequential irradiation with both wavelengths. As a result, under conditions without light irradiation, osteosarcoma cells maintained high viability on both PEEK and MoS₂@PEEK exhibiting a higher cell attachment density on MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK, which incorporates bioactive feature of 2D MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e, compared to the PEEK. Subsequently, cellular behavior was analyzed after irradiation with 650 nm and 808 nm, either individually or in combination, followed by 1 and 3 days of cell culturing. On day 1, partial cell death was observed in the MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK (PDT) group irradiated with 650 nm only, while the MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK (PTT) group irradiated with 808 nm only showed a more pronounced cytotoxic effect compared to the PDT group. However, in both conditions, cancer cells were not complete eliminated, and remaining residual cells were observed. In contrast, in the MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK (Dual) group, where 808 nm irradiation was applied sequentially after 650 nm irradiation, complete cell death with no surviving cells were observed (\u003cb\u003eFig. S14\u003c/b\u003e). By day 3, cells proliferated rapidly in both the PEEK and MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK groups, confirming high density cell survival, whereas in the MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK (PDT) and MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK (PTT) groups exhibited moderate cytotoxicity, and the proliferation of residual cancer cells was observed. However, in the MoS₂@PEEK (Dual) group, complete cell death was shown, clearly confirming the synergistic therapeutic effect resulting from the combined application of PDT and PTT (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003ea \u003cb\u003eand Fig. S15\u003c/b\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSubsequently, the extent of cancer cell death was evaluated quantitatively as shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003eb. Under conditions without photo-irradiation, MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK exhibited a higher tendency for cell adhesion and proliferation compared to PEEK, and cell viability was significantly increased on day 3. In contrast, in the MoS₂@PEEK (PDT) group, 16.13% cell death was observed on day 1 compared to PEEK. However, on day 3, the survival rate increased by 38.12% due to the proliferation of residual cells. In the MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK (PTT) group, 48.67% cell death was observed on day 1, indicating higher therapeutic efficacy than the PDT group. However, the survival rate increased by 41.22% on day 3, due to the proliferation of residual cells. In contrast, the MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK (Dual) group induced complete cell death on day 1, and no proliferation of residual cancer cells was observed thereafter. These results suggest that the combined application of PDT and PTT induces a significantly enhanced anticancer effect compared to monotherapy, and that complete elimination of cancer cells is achievable through the synergistic interaction of the two therapeutic modalities [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e57\u003c/span\u003e]. This can be attributed to the generation of ROS under PDT conditions inducing lipid peroxidation in cell membranes, compromising membrane integrity, and inhibiting enzyme activity and cellular function through the oxidative denaturation of proteins. Furthermore, by disrupting the mitochondrial membrane potential and inhibiting ATP production, ROS disrupt cellular energy metabolism, ultimately leading to cell death or necrosis. However, as ROS are highly reactive, their diffusion within cells is limited, and they can be partially eliminated by intracellular antioxidant systems, which limits to induce uniform and complete cell death throughout the entire cell [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e58\u003c/span\u003e]. In contrast, heat induced under PTT conditions causes nonselective and irreversible damage throughout the cell. The rise in temperature increases the fluidity of the cell membrane and destabilizes the lipid bilayer, thereby increasing membrane permeability, which leads to the leakage of cellular contents and the disruption of ion homeostasis. Simultaneously, thermal denaturation of proteins, enzyme inactivation, mitochondrial dysfunction, and cytoskeletal collapse are induced, leading to cell death. However, as heat dissipates into the surrounding environment, some cells may survive if the local temperature is not maintained above a certain level, and complete elimination of cells is limited due to the adaptive response of cells to heat stress [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e59\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e60\u003c/span\u003e]. In contrast, under dual-phototherapy conditions, cell death proceeds irreversibly as initial cell damage caused by ROS and subsequent damage caused by induced heat consecutively. Although oxidative damage induced by PDT does not immediately induce cell death, it renders cell membranes and intracellular structures vulnerable and partially disrupts the antioxidant defense system. Under these conditions, when additional thermal stress is applied via PTT, the already damaged cell membranes collapse more easily, and the denaturation of proteins and organelles accelerates, leading to irreversible loss of cellular function [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e]. Furthermore, the rise in temperature increases the reaction rate of ROS and promotes their diffusion within the cell, thereby further amplifying oxidative damage. Consequently, while under single PDT or PTT conditions, the respective damage mechanisms act partially, leaving residual cells, under dual-phototherapy conditions, chemical and physical damage interact synergistically. This simultaneously disrupts the structural and functional elements essential for cell survival, leading to complete cell death [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e61\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.5 \u003cem\u003eIn vitro\u003c/em\u003e Synergistic Dual-Phototherapeutic Antibacterial Performance of MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK Scaffold\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlong with tumor recurrence, bacterial infection at the surgical site represents another critical clinical challenge. Bacterial infection triggers an inflammatory response, promoting the excessive secretion of inflammatory cytokines, thereby increasing cellular toxicity and delaying tissue healing. Furthermore, biofilms formed by bacteria can increase antibiotic resistance and induce immune evasion, potentially leading to chronic infection. This infectious environment not only inhibits cell adhesion and proliferation but also significantly impairs bone regeneration by suppressing osteogenesis-related signaling pathways [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e62\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e63\u003c/span\u003e]. Consequently, inadequate control of bacterial infection can further compromise tissue regeneration and worsen long-term clinical outcomes [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e64\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e]. To address this challenge, this study further investigated the potential of MoS₂@PEEK scaffolds as a dual photo-responsive antibacterial platform utilizing external light stimulation. In particular, we aimed to evaluate the antibacterial efficacy induced by PTT and PDT, both individually and in combination (dual-phototherapy), under controlled irradiation conditions. The antibacterial activity under the same phototherapy conditions used for tumor ablation was evaluated. To verify the photoresponsive antimicrobial effect of the MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK scaffold, Escherichia coli (\u003cem\u003eE. coli\u003c/em\u003e), a representative Gram-negative bacterium, and Staphylococcus aureus (\u003cem\u003eS. aureus\u003c/em\u003e), a Gram-positive bacterium, were comprehensively analyzed for morphological changes, the extent of death, and colony-forming ability.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe morphology of each bacteria cultured on the samples depending on the phototherapy condition was observed by SEM. SEM morphology revealed that in the PEEK and MoS₂@PEEK groups, which were not subjected to light irradiation, \u003cem\u003eE. coli\u003c/em\u003e appeared as rod-shaped bacteria, while \u003cem\u003eS. aureus\u003c/em\u003e appeared as cocci arranged in a grape-like cluster. It was confirmed that both strains maintained their normal structures without cell membrane damage and were stably attached to the scaffold surface (\u003cb\u003eFig. S16\u003c/b\u003e) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e66\u003c/span\u003e]. In contrast, partial damage and deformation of the cell surface were observed in the MoS₂@PEEK (PDT) group, while more pronounced structural damage, such as cell membrane contraction and collapse, was confirmed in the MoS₂@PEEK (PTT) group. In particular, in the MoS₂@PEEK (Dual) group, severe disruption of the cell membrane and complete loss of bacterial morphology were observed, confirming a significantly enhanced synergistic antibacterial effect compared to each phototherapy in both strains (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003ec \u003cb\u003eand d\u003c/b\u003e). To confirm the extent of bacterial killing alongside these morphological changes, live/dead fluorescence staining was performed. In the PEEK and MoS₂@PEEK groups, green fluorescence indicating surviving bacteria was predominantly observed for both strains, while red fluorescence indicating death was rarely observed, confirming the high survival rate (\u003cb\u003eFig. S17\u003c/b\u003e). In contrast, partial bacterial deaths was observed in the MoS₂@PEEK (PDT) and MoS₂@PEEK (PTT) groups, with a higher killing effect observed particularly in the PTT group. In the MoS₂@PEEK (Dual) group, however, only red fluorescence was observed in both strains, indicating complete bacterial death, thereby clearly confirming the synergistic effect resulting from the combined application of the two phototherapies (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003ee \u003cb\u003eand f\u003c/b\u003e). To quantitatively verify these antibacterial effects, a colony-forming ability analysis was performed. In the PEEK and MoS₂@PEEK groups, high levels of colony formation were observed for both bacterial strains, and no statistically significant differences were found (\u003cb\u003eFig. S18\u003c/b\u003e). In contrast, in the MoS₂@PEEK (PDT) and MoS₂@PEEK (PTT) groups, the number of colonies decreased significantly, but the survival of some bacteria was still confirmed. In particular, in the MoS₂@PEEK (Dual) group, almost no colony formation was observed for either strain, indicating that complete bacterial killing was induced (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003eg \u003cb\u003eand h\u003c/b\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOverall, the differences in antimicrobial effects observed in this study are interpreted as resulting from differences in the damage mechanisms acting on the bacteria and their interactions. Under PDT conditions, ROS partially damage the bacterial cell membrane and cell wall and inhibit metabolic functions. However, since the damage is localized, some extent of bacteria can survive [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e67\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e68\u003c/span\u003e]. In contrast, under PTT conditions, heat reduces the structural stability of the cell membrane and cell wall and induces morphological collapse; however, due to heat diffusion, there are limitations to completely eliminating all bacteria [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR69\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e69\u003c/span\u003e]. Under dual-phototherapy conditions, PTT further acts on bacterial structures weakened by PDT, accelerating the breakdown of cell membrane and cell wall. This leads to simultaneous leakage of intracellular contents and structural disintegration, resulting in irreversible damage. Consequently, while single-modality therapy results in only partial bacterial killing, dual-phototherapy induces complete bacterial killing through the simultaneous accumulation of structural and functional damage [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e67\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR70\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e70\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.6 \u003cem\u003eIn vitro\u003c/em\u003e Integrated Osteogenic and Angiogenic Regenerative Performance of MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK scaffold\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFollowing the therapeutic performances through photoresponsive-based anticancer and antibacterial effects, this study sought to assess cellular behavior during the regeneration phase post-treatment. In the context of actual bone regeneration, subsequent to tumor excision and infection management, it is imperative to continuously induce cell adhesion, proliferation, and differentiation within the compromised tissue environment. Notably, effective tissue reconstruction necessitates the concurrent occurrence of osteoblast activity and vascular formation [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e71\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e72\u003c/span\u003e]. Consequently, conditions conducive to inducing cellular responses while minimizing phototherapy-induced cell damage were applied during the regeneration stage. Although the same 808 nm NIR conditions were employed, the extent of thermal stimulation in normal cells is mitigated by cell\u0026ndash;substrate interactions and the diffusion environment, unlike in cancer cells and bacteria [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e73\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR74\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e74\u003c/span\u003e]. Furthermore, photothermal stimulation devoid of accompanying ROS serves as a non-damaging stimulus. It is established that photothermal stimulation under these conditions enhances cell membrane fluidity and activates intracellular signal transduction, thereby facilitating cell adhesion and proliferation [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR75\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e75\u003c/span\u003e]. The experimental groups comprised four types based on scaffold type and irradiation status: PEEK (\u0026minus;), PEEK (+), MoS₂@PEEK (\u0026minus;), and MoS₂@PEEK (+), where (\u0026minus;) and (+) denote the absence or presence of 808 nm NIR, respectively. The irradiation intensity and duration were consistent with the conditions utilized in the preceding anticancer and antibacterial experiments, yet designed to compare variations in cellular responses within the regenerative environment. Utilizing the pre-osteoblast cell line MC3T3-E1 and the vascular endothelial cell HUVEC, we conducted a comprehensive evaluation of cell adhesion, proliferation, and differentiation behavior on the scaffold to verify biological compatibility and the potential for functional vascularized bone regeneration during the post-treatment regeneration stage.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCell adhesion represents the initial phase in scaffold based tissue regeneration and is a critical process that influences subsequent cell proliferation and differentiation. Specifically, cell adhesion is intricately linked to the development of an ECM like environment that facilitates cell-substrate interactions. The binding of cells to substrates, primarily through integrins, leads to the formation of focal adhesion complexes and the activation of intracellular signaling pathways. These mechanical and biochemical signals not only prompt cytoskeletal rearrangement and stabilization of cell morphology but also directly affect cell survival, proliferation, and differentiation via downstream signaling cascades [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR76\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e76\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR77\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e77\u003c/span\u003e]. In the case of osteoblasts, insufficient stable adhesion can impede actin cytoskeleton formation, potentially resulting in diminished expression of genes associated with osteogenic differentiation. Moreover, inadequate cell-substrate interactions can hinder the secretion and remodeling of ECM proteins, thereby limiting the establishment of a microenvironment essential for tissue regeneration [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR78\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e78\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR79\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e79\u003c/span\u003e]. Consequently, the initial cell adhesion characteristics on the scaffold surface serve as a predictive indicator for subsequent cell proliferation, differentiation, and ultimately, the efficacy of tissue regeneration [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR80\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e80\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR81\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e81\u003c/span\u003e]. From this standpoint, examining the initial cell adhesion behavior and morphological characteristics is deemed a crucial process for assessing the regeneration-friendly properties of MoS₂@PEEK scaffolds. 6 h post-seeding onto the scaffolds, cell adhesion behavior was evaluated using DAPI and phalloidin fluorescence staining as well as SEM analysis. As shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003ea, both PEEK (\u0026minus;) and PEEK (+) demonstrated limited cell adhesion, with cells tending to maintain a rounded morphology, showing no significant differences between the two. Conversely, on MoS₂@PEEK, the incorporation of 2D monolayer MoS₂ enhanced biological activity, resulting in cells spreading over a wider area, with the MoS₂@PEEK (+) group under NIR hyperthermia exhibiting the most pronounced cell adhesion behavior.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo quantitatively evaluate cell adhesion, both fluorescence image-based cell adhesion density and SEM observation-based cell spreading area were analyzed. The fluorescence image analysis revealed no significant difference between PEEK (\u0026minus;) and PEEK (+), with values of 7.97\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.24% and 7.36\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.47%, respectively. In contrast, MoS₂@PEEK (\u0026minus;) exhibited a 157.21% increase to 20.5\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.57% compared to PEEK (\u0026minus;), and MoS₂@PEEK (+) demonstrated a 250.69% increase to 27.95\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.74% (\u003cb\u003eFig. S19a\u003c/b\u003e). SEM analysis of the average cell spreading area per cell indicated no significant difference between PEEK (\u0026minus;) and PEEK (+), but an increase to 337.33 \u0026micro;m\u0026sup2; in MoS₂@PEEK (\u0026minus;) and 536.99 \u0026micro;m\u0026sup2; in MoS₂@PEEK (+) compared to PEEK (\u0026minus;) (\u003cb\u003eFig. S19b\u003c/b\u003e). These findings clearly illustrate the enhanced biological activity on the surface due to MoS₂ incorporation and the improved cell adhesion effect from NIR hyperthermia [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e]. Based on this initial cell adhesion, cell proliferation behavior was assessed to determine whether initial adhesion subsequently led to actual cell growth and tissue formation. As shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003eb, proliferation analysis showed no significant difference between PEEK (\u0026minus;) and PEEK (+) at both day 1 and day 3, indicating that light irradiation alone had no effect on cell proliferation in the light-inactive PEEK groups. Conversely, MoS₂@PEEK (\u0026minus;) exhibited a 36.27% increase at day 1 and 116.14% at day 3 compared to PEEK (\u0026minus;), while MoS₂@PEEK (+) showed the highest cell proliferation, with increases of 50.94% and 125.62% at day 1 and day 3, respectively, compared to PEEK (\u0026minus;). These results are interpreted as a synergistic effect of increased surface biological activity due to MoS₂ incorporation, alongside NIR-driven photothermal stimulation reinforcing cell\u0026ndash;substrate interactions and activating intracellular signaling, thereby effectively promoting cell proliferation [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR82\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e82\u003c/span\u003e]. Building on these cell proliferation characteristics, the effect on osteogenic differentiation and functional maturation, beyond simple cell number increase, was analyzed to determine the potential for functional tissue formation. Osteogenic differentiation was assessed using alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity as an early differentiation marker, and alizarin red S (ARS) staining as a marker for mineral deposition. ALP is a key enzyme expressed during the early stage of osteoblast differentiation, acting a critical role in phosphate metabolism and initiating mineralization by providing inorganic phosphate for hydroxyapatite formation [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR83\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e83\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR84\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e84\u003c/span\u003e]. In parallel, ARS staining is employed to evaluate late-stage osteogenic differentiation by quantifying calcium-rich mineralized matrix deposition, which reflects the formation of mature bone-like tissue [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR85\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e85\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR86\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e86\u003c/span\u003e]. ALP analysis showed no significant difference between PEEK (\u0026minus;) and PEEK (+) up to day 14, however, MoS₂@PEEK (\u0026minus;) had a 14.96% increase at day 7 and a 43.70% increase at day 14 compared to PEEK (\u0026minus;). MoS₂@PEEK (+) showed the highest ALP activity, with increases of 17.91% at day 7 and 50.01% at day 14 versus PEEK (\u0026minus;) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003ec).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings indicate that the surface characteristics of MoS₂ and photothermal stimulation significantly enhance enzymatic activity and osteogenic signaling during the initial differentiation phase of osteoblasts. A similar pattern was observed in bone mineralization, as assessed by ARS staining. While the PEEK groups exhibited relatively weak staining intensity, the groups incorporating MoS₂ showed progressively greater red staining intensity, with the most pronounced red deposition observed in the MoS₂@PEEK (+) group under NIR hyperthermia, visually indicating the most active calcium-based mineral accumulation (\u003cb\u003eFig. S20\u003c/b\u003e). Quantitative analysis supported these observations that MoS₂@PEEK (\u0026minus;) increased by 14.55% at day 7 and 23.51% at day 14 compared to PEEK (\u0026minus;), while MoS₂@PEEK (+) increased by 17.75% and 31.38% at day 7 and day 14, respectively, demonstrating the highest level of mineralization (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003ed). From the results, both the enhanced surface biological activity through MoS₂ incorporation and the NIR-based photothermal stimulation were found to sequentially augment not only cell adhesion and proliferation but also the early differentiation and late-stage mineral deposition (ARS) of osteoblasts. This suggests that MoS₂@PEEK scaffolds effectively provide a functional microenvironment conducive to bone regeneration [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEffective tissue formation during bone regeneration necessitates not only the activation of osteoblasts but also the provision of oxygen and nutrients through vascularization. Consequently, this study extends beyond osteoblast-based evaluation to analyze the biological behavior of vascular endothelial cells on the scaffold, thereby assessing the potential for vascularization within the regenerative microenvironment [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR87\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e87\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR88\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e88\u003c/span\u003e]. From this perspective, the ability of the scaffold surface to effectively induce the initial attachment interactions of vascular endothelial cells is considered a critical stage in predicting subsequent vascular formation and the potential for functional tissue regeneration [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR89\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e89\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR90\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e90\u003c/span\u003e]. Accordingly, using HUVECs, we initially evaluated the attachment behavior one day post-cell seeding through SEM and DAPI/phalloidin staining. The results indicated that, similar to osteoblasts, the PEEK group without photo-reactivity exhibited low cell attachment density and limited cytoplasmic spreading, irrespective of NIR irradiation. Conversely, in the MoS₂@PEEK (\u0026minus;) group, cell density and attachment were significantly enhanced due to increased surface bioactivity and interfacial interactions conferred by the MoS₂ monolayer. Furthermore, as depicted in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003ee, in the MoS₂@PEEK (+) group, where NIR-based hyperthermia stimulation was applied, the most pronounced initial cell attachment behavior was observed, suggesting that the MoS₂-based surface activation and hyperthermia stimulation synergistically enhanced cell attachment. Quantitative evaluation revealed no significant difference in cell attachment density between PEEK (\u0026minus;) and PEEK (+), based on fluorescence image analysis. MoS₂@PEEK (\u0026minus;) demonstrated a 12.8% increase, while MoS₂@PEEK (+) exhibited a 19% increase in cell density compared to PEEK (\u0026minus;) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003ef). Furthermore, analysis of the average cell spreading area per cell, derived from SEM images, revealed no difference in the PEEK group with or without NIR exposure. In contrast, MoS₂@PEEK (\u0026minus;) and MoS₂@PEEK (+) showed increases of 409.98 \u0026micro;m\u0026sup2; and 670.54 \u0026micro;m\u0026sup2;, respectively, over PEEK (\u0026minus;), confirming statistically significant enhancements in cell attachment (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003eg). These findings suggest that interfacial activation resulting from MoS₂ incorporation and NIR-induced hyperthermia effectively enhances initial cell\u0026ndash;matrix interactions. To ascertain whether these initial interactions underpin the sustained growth and functional expansion of vascular endothelial cells, we assessed cell proliferation behavior. The results indicated no significant difference in the PEEK group between NIR and non-NIR conditions on both day 1 and day 3 post-cell attachment. Conversely, MoS₂@PEEK (\u0026minus;) exhibited a 6.89% increase on day 1 and a 13.33% increase on day 3 compared to PEEK (\u0026minus;), while MoS₂@PEEK (+) showed increases of 22.30% and 41.88% on days 1 and 3, respectively, indicating the highest cell proliferation (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003eh). This suggests that interfacial activation by the MoS₂ monolayer positively influences not only initial attachment but also the cell proliferation phase, with hyperthermia stimulation induced by NIR irradiation further enhancing cellular activation. In conclusion, the synergistic effects of increased surface biological activity due to MoS₂ introduction and hyperthermia stimulation induced by NIR irradiation effectively reinforced cell\u0026ndash;implant interactions, significantly promoting cell attachment, proliferation, and functional activation. This trend was consistently observed in both osteoblasts and vascular endothelial cells, indicating that the NIR-stimulated MoS₂@PEEK platform provides an integrated regenerative microenvironment capable of simultaneously inducing vascularization and bone regeneration [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR91\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e91\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR92\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e92\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eOur study proposes a personalized orthopedic scaffold-based theragenerative platform that effectively induce antitumor, antibacterial, and vascularized bone tissue regenerative effects. This approach was achieved by fabricating patient-specific 3D-printed scaffolds using manufactured PEEK filaments, followed by the surface functionalization with 2D monolayer MoS₂ using a polymer-assisted transfer process that was synthesized from MoO₂ nanoparticle precursors via a nanoseed initiated APCVD process. The resulting MoS₂@PEEK scaffold, characterized by uniform thin-film structural integrity and exceptional shape reproducibility, offers high design flexibility to accommodate various anatomical defect sites. Importantly, the MoS₂-based surface exhibits pronounced dual photoresponsiveness, enabling the precise and non-invasive induction of combined photothermal and photodynamic effects under external stimulation. Furthermore, the MoS₂ interface compensates for the previously lacking therapeutic and regenerative functions of PEEK, conferring antitumor and antibacterial capabilities under dual wavelength irradiation while significantly enhancing cell adhesion, proliferation, and differentiation. Through the synergistic effects of these two photo-responsive therapeutic mechanisms, the MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e@PEEK scaffold achieved effective tumor cell ablation and significant antibacterial performance. Furthermore, under the same photothermal stimulation conditions, the MoS₂ active interface dynamically regulates the cellular microenvironment, promoting the activation of osteoblasts and vascular endothelial cells and inducing biological behaviors conducive to vascularized bone regeneration. As a result, the MoS₂@PEEK scaffold demonstrated its potential as a multifunctional theragenerative platform capable of integrating tumor suppression, infection control, and tissue regeneration. Although further validation regarding long-term \u003cem\u003ein vivo\u003c/em\u003e stability and immune responses is required, the MoS₂@PEEK-based theragenerative platform proposed in this study is suggested to be a promising strategy capable of comprehensively resolving the complex clinical issues arising after surgical resection of osteosarcoma on a single platform. Furthermore, this scaffold, realized through the convergence of 3D printing-based patient-specific design and 2D nanomaterial-based surface engineering, presents significant potential as a next-generation theragenerative platform for future tissue engineering and orthopedic clinical applications.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor Contributions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJ. H. Seo, and I. H. Choi contributed equally to this work. J. H. Seo, and I. H. Choi wrote the manuscript all of the activities. M.-H. Kang, and H.-D. Jung edited the manuscript. S. J. Bang, H. S. Kang, J. Y. Gwon, C. H. Moon, N. Y. Lee, and G. W. Kim supported the fabrication of the 3D-printed PEEK and performed the structural and mechanical analyses. J. H. Kim, H. J. Joo, J. H. Kim, Y. H. Cho, E. S. Song, and S. J. Choi assisted the synthesis of the 2D monolayer MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e. J. W. Park, D. J. Kim, and S. S. Kang contributed to TEM imaging and analyzing the structure. K. S. Yang, G. D. Cha, and S.-H. Lee contributed to explanation of \u003cem\u003ein vitro\u003c/em\u003e tests. J. H. Seo, I. H. Choi, M.-H. Kang, and H.-D. Jung contributed to interpretation and discussion of the results.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDeclaration of Competing\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;Interest\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003es\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare no competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have influenced the work reported in this study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAcknowledgements\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe gratefully acknowledge the technical assistance and support provided by the contributors to this study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFunding\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis work was supported by the Nano \u0026amp; Material Technology Development Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by Ministry of Science and ICT (MSIT) (RS-2026-25537604) and the NRF grant funded by the Korea government (No. RS-2024-00405381; RS-2025-00513935; No. RS-2025-00521275); and the Korea Institute of Marine Science \u0026amp; Technology Promotion (KIMST) funded by the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries (RS-2024-00405273); and Korean Fund for Regenerative Medicine (KFRM) grant funded by the Korea government (the Ministry of Science and ICT, the Ministry of Health \u0026amp; Welfare, KFRM 24A0105L1); and Korea Basic Science Institute (National research Facilities and Equipment Center) grant funded by the Ministry of Science and ICT (No. RS-2025-00564228). This study was supported by the Research Fund, 2024 of The Catholic University of Korea.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData availability\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eData will be made available on request.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDeclaration of Competing\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;Interest\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003es\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare no competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have influenced the work reported in this study.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eW. Dai, Y. Zheng, B. Li, F. Yang, W. Chen, Y. Li et al., A 3D-printed orthopedic implant with dual-effect synergy based on MoS2 and hydroxyapatite nanoparticles for tumor therapy and bone regeneration. Colloids Surf., B \u003cb\u003e228\u003c/b\u003e, 113384 (2023). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfb.2023.113384\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.colsurfb.2023.113384\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJ. Shi, J. Li, Y. Wang, J. Cheng, C.Y. Zhang, Recent advances in MoS(2)-based photothermal therapy for cancer and infectious disease treatment. J. Mater. Chem. B \u003cb\u003e8\u003c/b\u003e(27), 5793\u0026ndash;5807 (2020). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1039/d0tb01018a\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1039/d0tb01018a\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eL. Vidal, C. Kampleitner, M.A. Brennan, A. Hoornaert, P. Layrolle, Reconstruction of Large Skeletal Defects: Current Clinical Therapeutic Strategies and Future Directions Using 3D Printing. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. \u003cb\u003e8\u003c/b\u003e(61) (2020). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.3389/fbioe.2020.00061\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fbioe.2020.00061\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eW.J. Chong, A. Sola, Y. Li, P.F.A. Wright, C. Wen, Synergistic Advances in Additive Manufacturing and Surface Engineering for Polymeric Biomedical Devices. ACS Polym. Au. \u003cb\u003e5\u003c/b\u003e(6), 781\u0026ndash;810 (2025). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1021/acspolymersau.5c00102\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1021/acspolymersau.5c00102\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eP. Qiu, V. Bennani, P. Cooper, G. Dias, J. Ratnayake, Surface chemistry on PEEK surfaces: From enhanced biofunctionality to improved surface modifiability. Appl. Mater. Today. \u003cb\u003e41\u003c/b\u003e (2024). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.apmt.2024.102523\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.apmt.2024.102523\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eI.V. Panayotov, V. Orti, F. Cuisinier, J. Yachouh, Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) for medical applications. J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Med. \u003cb\u003e27\u003c/b\u003e(7), 118 (2016). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1007/s10856-016-5731-4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10856-016-5731-4\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eH.-D. Jung, S. Park, H. Kang, M.-H. Lee, S.-M. Kim, H.-E. Estrin, Polyetheretherketone/magnesium composite selectively coated with hydroxyapatite for enhanced in vitro bio-corrosion resistance and biocompatibility. Mater. Lett. \u003cb\u003e116\u003c/b\u003e, 20\u0026ndash;22 (2014). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.matlet.2013.10.062\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.matlet.2013.10.062\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eH.D. Jung, H.S. Park, M.H. Kang, Y. Li, H.E. Kim, Y.H. Koh et al., Reinforcement of polyetheretherketone polymer with titanium for improved mechanical properties and in vitro biocompatibility. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. B Appl. Biomater. \u003cb\u003e104\u003c/b\u003e(1), 141\u0026ndash;148 (2016). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1002/jbm.b.33361\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/jbm.b.33361\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eT.S. Jang, S.J. Park, J.E. Lee, J. Yang, S.H. Park, M.B.G. Jun et al., Topography-Supported Nanoarchitectonics of Hybrid Scaffold for Systematically Modulated Bone Regeneration and Remodeling. Adv. Funct. Mater. \u003cb\u003e32\u003c/b\u003e(51) (2022). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1002/adfm.202206863\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/adfm.202206863\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eS. Wang, F. Wang, X. Zhao, F. Yang, Y. Xu, F. Yan et al., The effect of near-infrared light-assisted photothermal therapy combined with polymer materials on promoting bone regeneration: A systematic review. Mater. Design. \u003cb\u003e217\u003c/b\u003e (2022). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.matdes.2022.110621\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.matdes.2022.110621\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eA. Salehi Moghaddam, M. Bahrami, E. Sarikhani, R. Tutar, Y.N. Ertas, F. Tamimi et al., Engineering the Immune Response to Biomaterials. Adv. Sci. (Weinh). \u003cb\u003e12\u003c/b\u003e(19), e2414724 (2025). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1002/advs.202414724\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/advs.202414724\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eU. Yadav, H. Mishra, V. Singh, S. Kashyap, A. Srivastava, S. Yadav et al., Enhanced Osteogenesis by Molybdenum Disulfide Nanosheet Reinforced Hydroxyapatite Nanocomposite Scaffolds. ACS Biomater. Sci. Eng. \u003cb\u003e5\u003c/b\u003e(9), 4511\u0026ndash;4521 (2019). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1021/acsbiomaterials.9b00227\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1021/acsbiomaterials.9b00227\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eF. Chen, Y. Luo, X. Liu, Y. Zheng, Y. Han, D. Yang et al., 2D Molybdenum Sulfide-Based Materials for Photo-Excited Antibacterial Application. Adv. Healthc. Mater. \u003cb\u003e11\u003c/b\u003e(13), e2200360 (2022). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1002/adhm.202200360\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/adhm.202200360\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eT. Liu, Z. Liu, 2D MoS(2) Nanostructures for Biomedical Applications. Adv. Healthc. Mater. \u003cb\u003e7\u003c/b\u003e(8), e1701158 (2018). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1002/adhm.201701158\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/adhm.201701158\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eA. Kumar, A. Sood, S.S. Han, Molybdenum disulfide (MoS(2))-based nanostructures for tissue engineering applications: prospects and challenges. J. Mater. Chem. B \u003cb\u003e10\u003c/b\u003e(15), 2761\u0026ndash;2780 (2022). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1039/d2tb00131d\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1039/d2tb00131d\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eS. Bharti, S.K. Tripathi, K. Singh, Recent progress in MoS(2) nanostructures for biomedical applications: Experimental and computational approach. Anal. Biochem. \u003cb\u003e685\u003c/b\u003e(115404) (2024). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.ab.2023.115404\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ab.2023.115404\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eM.H. Shin, S.M. Baek, A.V. Polyakov, I.P. Semenova, R.Z. Valiev, W.B. Hwang et al., Molybdenum Disulfide Surface Modification of Ultrafine-Grained Titanium for Enhanced Cellular Growth and Antibacterial Effect. Sci. Rep. \u003cb\u003e8\u003c/b\u003e(1), 9907 (2018). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1038/s41598-018-28367-0\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/s41598-018-28367-0\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eK.A. Singh, J. Soukar, M. Zulkifli, A. Kersey, G. Lokhande, S. Ghosh et al., Atomic vacancies of molybdenum disulfide nanoparticles stimulate mitochondrial biogenesis. Nat. Commun. \u003cb\u003e15\u003c/b\u003e(1), 8136 (2024). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1038/s41467-024-52276-8\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/s41467-024-52276-8\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eR. Wu, M. Dong, L. Liu, Nano\u0026ndash;Bio Interface of Molybdenum Disulfide for Biological Applications. Coatings. \u003cb\u003e13\u003c/b\u003e(6) (2023). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.3390/coatings13061122\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/coatings13061122\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZ. Ye, C. Tan, X. Huang, Y. Ouyang, L. Yang, Z. Wang et al., Emerging MoS(2) Wafer-Scale Technique for Integrated Circuits. Nanomicro Lett. \u003cb\u003e15\u003c/b\u003e(1), 38 (2023). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1007/s40820-022-01010-4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s40820-022-01010-4\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJ. Kim, H. Seung, D. Kang, J. Kim, H. Bae, H. Park et al., Wafer-Scale Production of Transition Metal Dichalcogenides and Alloy Monolayers by Nanocrystal Conversion for Large-Scale Ultrathin Flexible Electronics. Nano Lett. \u003cb\u003e21\u003c/b\u003e(21), 9153\u0026ndash;9163 (2021). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1021/acs.nanolett.1c02991\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1021/acs.nanolett.1c02991\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eH. Lee, G. Han, Y. Na, M. Kang, S.J. Bang, H.S. Kang et al., 3D-Printed Tissue‐Specific Nanospike‐Based Adhesive Materials for Time‐Regulated Synergistic Tumor Therapy and Tissue Regeneration In Vivo. Adv. Funct. Mater. \u003cb\u003e34\u003c/b\u003e(48) (2024). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1002/adfm.202406237\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/adfm.202406237\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJ. Zheng, H. Zhao, Z. Ouyang, X. Zhou, J. Kang, C. Yang et al., Additively-manufactured PEEK/HA porous scaffolds with excellent osteogenesis for bone tissue repairing. Compos. Part. B: Eng. \u003cb\u003e232\u003c/b\u003e (2022). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.compositesb.2021.109508\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.compositesb.2021.109508\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eX. Wei, W. Zhou, Z. Tang, H. Wu, Y. Liu, H. Dong et al., Magnesium surface-activated 3D printed porous PEEK scaffolds for in vivo osseointegration by promoting angiogenesis and osteogenesis. Bioact Mater. \u003cb\u003e20\u003c/b\u003e, 16\u0026ndash;28 (2023). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.bioactmat.2022.05.011\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.bioactmat.2022.05.011\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eH.D. Jung, T.S. Jang, J.E. Lee, S.J. Park, Y. Son, S.H. Park, Enhanced bioactivity of titanium-coated polyetheretherketone implants created by a high-temperature 3D printing process. Biofabrication. \u003cb\u003e11\u003c/b\u003e(4), 045014 (2019). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1088/1758-5090/ab376b\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1088/1758-5090/ab376b\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eH. Zhang, Y. Wang, H. Qiang, D. Leng, L. Yang, X. Hu et al., Exploring the frontiers: The potential and challenges of bioactive scaffolds in osteosarcoma treatment and bone regeneration. Mater. Today Bio. \u003cb\u003e29\u003c/b\u003e(101276) (2024). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.mtbio.2024.101276\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.mtbio.2024.101276\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eM. Zhao, H. Yang, Q. Yang, C. Zhang, J. Liu, Z. Wu et al., A Multifunctional PEEK Composite Scaffold with Immunomodulatory, Angiogenic, and Osteogenic Properties for Enhanced Bone Regeneration. Polym. (Basel). \u003cb\u003e17\u003c/b\u003e(9) (2025). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.3390/polym17091206\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/polym17091206\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eY. Zhang, L. Wang, X. Long, C. Yan, Q. Wang, D. Huang et al., Multi-functional PEEK implants enhance osseointegration in OVX rat by remodeling the bone immune microenvironment. Colloids Surf. B Biointerfaces. \u003cb\u003e245\u003c/b\u003e(114219) (2025). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.colsurfb.2024.114219\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.colsurfb.2024.114219\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eW. Li, Z. Su, Y. Hu, L. Meng, F. Zhu, B. Xie et al., Functional and structural construction of photothermal-responsive PEEK composite implants to promote bone regeneration and bone-implant integration. Compos. Sci. Technol. \u003cb\u003e258\u003c/b\u003e (2024). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.compscitech.2024.110885\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.compscitech.2024.110885\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eC. Zhu, M. He, D. Sun, Y. Huang, L. Huang, M. Du et al., 3D-Printed Multifunctional Polyetheretherketone Bone Scaffold for Multimodal Treatment of Osteosarcoma and Osteomyelitis. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces. \u003cb\u003e13\u003c/b\u003e(40), 47327\u0026ndash;47340 (2021). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1021/acsami.1c10898\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1021/acsami.1c10898\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eA.R. Zanjanijam, I. Major, J.G. Lyons, U. Lafont, D.M. Devine, Fused filament fabrication of PEEK: a review of process-structure-property relationships. Polymers. \u003cb\u003e12\u003c/b\u003e(8), 1665 (2020)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eS. Roy, K.A. Deo, K.A. Singh, H.P. Lee, A. Jaiswal, A.K. Gaharwar, Nano-bio interactions of 2D molybdenum disulfide. Adv. Drug Deliv Rev. \u003cb\u003e187\u003c/b\u003e(114361) (2022). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.addr.2022.114361\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.addr.2022.114361\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003evan der T.A.B. Boon, L.E. Tromp, L. Ge, L. Yang, C.F. Guimaraes, P.T. Kuhn et al., Double-Orthogonal Gradient-Based High-Throughput Screening Platform for Studying Cell Response Toward Combined Physicochemical Biomaterial Properties. Small Sci. \u003cb\u003e4\u003c/b\u003e(1), 2300172 (2024). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1002/smsc.202300172\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/smsc.202300172\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eL.E. Tromp, de R. Jong, van der T.A.B. Boon, A.R. Mahecha, R. Bank, de J. Boer et al., Harnessing the power of physicochemical material property screening to direct breast epithelial and breast cancer cells. Bioact Mater. \u003cb\u003e50\u003c/b\u003e, 494\u0026ndash;509 (2025). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.bioactmat.2025.04.003\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.bioactmat.2025.04.003\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eH. Liu, J. Zhao, T.H. Ly, Clean Transfer of Two-Dimensional Materials: A Comprehensive Review. ACS Nano. \u003cb\u003e18\u003c/b\u003e(18), 11573\u0026ndash;11597 (2024). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1021/acsnano.4c01000\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1021/acsnano.4c01000\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eA.Y. Rwei, W. Wang, D.S. Kohane, Photoresponsive nanoparticles for drug delivery. Nano Today. \u003cb\u003e10\u003c/b\u003e(4), 451\u0026ndash;467 (2015). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.nantod.2015.06.004\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.nantod.2015.06.004\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u0026lt;10.1186s12951-020-00668-.pdf\u0026amp;gt\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eT. Liu, C. Wang, W. Cui, H. Gong, C. Liang, X. Shi et al., Combined photothermal and photodynamic therapy delivered by PEGylated MoS 2 nanosheets. Nanoscale. \u003cb\u003e6\u003c/b\u003e(19), 11219\u0026ndash;11225 (2014)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eR. Jin, J. Yang, P. Ding, C. Li, B. Zhang, W. Chen et al., Antitumor immunity triggered by photothermal therapy and photodynamic therapy of a 2D MoS(2) nanosheet-incorporated injectable polypeptide-engineered hydrogel combinated with chemotherapy for 4T1 breast tumor therapy. Nanotechnology. \u003cb\u003e31\u003c/b\u003e(20), 205102 (2020). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1088/1361-6528/ab72b9\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1088/1361-6528/ab72b9\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eH. Shu, Y. Li, X. Niu, J. Wang, Greatly Enhanced Optical Absorption of a Defective MoS2 Monolayer through Oxygen Passivation. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces. \u003cb\u003e8\u003c/b\u003e(20), 13150\u0026ndash;13156 (2016). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1021/acsami.6b03242\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1021/acsami.6b03242\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZ. Nie, R. Long, J.S. Teguh, C.-C. Huang, D.W. Hewak, E.K.L. Yeow et al., Ultrafast Electron and Hole Relaxation Pathways in Few-Layer MoS2. J. Phys. Chem. C \u003cb\u003e119\u003c/b\u003e(35), 20698\u0026ndash;20708 (2015). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1021/acs.jpcc.5b05048\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1021/acs.jpcc.5b05048\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eC.M. Frausto-Avila, V.M. Arellano-Arreola, J.M. Ya\u0026ntilde;ez Limon, De A. Luna-Bugallo, S. Gom\u0026egrave;s, P.-O. Chapuis, Thermal boundary conductance of CVD-grown MoS2 monolayer-on-silica substrate determined by scanning thermal microscopy. Appl. Phys. Lett. \u003cb\u003e120\u003c/b\u003e(26), (2022)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eA.J. Gabourie, \u0026Ccedil;. K\u0026ouml;roğlu, E. Pop, Substrate-dependence of monolayer MoS2 thermal conductivity and thermal boundary conductance. J. Appl. Phys. \u003cb\u003e131\u003c/b\u003e(19), (2022)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eQ. Li, B. Hu, Q. Yang, X. Cai, M. Nie, Y. Jin et al., Interaction mechanism between multi-layered MoS(2) and H(2)O(2) for self-generation of reactive oxygen species. Environ. Res. \u003cb\u003e191\u003c/b\u003e(110227) (2020). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.envres.2020.110227\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.envres.2020.110227\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eM.T.L. Lai, K.M. Lee, T.C.K. Yang, G.T. Pan, C.W. Lai, C.-Y. Chen et al., The improved photocatalytic activity of highly expanded MoS 2 under visible light emitting diodes. Nanoscale Adv. \u003cb\u003e3\u003c/b\u003e(4), 1106\u0026ndash;1120 (2021)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eM.Y. Peng, D.W. Zheng, S.B. Wang, S.X. Cheng, X.Z. Zhang, Multifunctional Nanosystem for Synergistic Tumor Therapy Delivered by Two-Dimensional MoS(2). ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces. \u003cb\u003e9\u003c/b\u003e(16), 13965\u0026ndash;13975 (2017). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1021/acsami.7b03276\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1021/acsami.7b03276\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eM. Overchuk, R.A. Weersink, B.C. Wilson, G. Zheng, Photodynamic and Photothermal Therapies: Synergy Opportunities for Nanomedicine. ACS Nano. \u003cb\u003e17\u003c/b\u003e(9), 7979\u0026ndash;8003 (2023). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1021/acsnano.3c00891\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1021/acsnano.3c00891\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJ.H. Seo, D.S. Won, H. Lee, S. Bang, H.S. Kang, J.Y. Gwon et al., Mechanically Robust Biodegradable Stents With Theragenerative Vascular Responses via Combined 3D Printing and Janus Nanoengineering. Adv. Sci. (Weinh). e23965 (2026). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1002/advs.202523965\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/advs.202523965\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eY. Na, Y. Park, H. Lee, S.H. Kim, S. Bang, H.S. Kang et al., Joule-Assisted Nanotherapeutic Urethral Stent (JANUS) for Spatiotemporal Theragenerative Treatment of Urethral Strictures. Adv. Funct. Mater. \u003cb\u003e35\u003c/b\u003e(37) (2025). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1002/adfm.202416694\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/adfm.202416694\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJ.H. Seo, H.-D. Jung, From antimicrobial attack to regeneration: AI-feedback bioelectronics for wound healing. Cell. Biomaterials. \u003cb\u003e2\u003c/b\u003e(3) (2026). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.celbio.2026.100371\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.celbio.2026.100371\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eY. Zhang, H. Li, L. Wang, H. Wang, X. Xie, S.L. Zhang et al., Photothermoelectric and photovoltaic effects both present in MoS2. Sci. Rep. \u003cb\u003e5\u003c/b\u003e(7938) (2015). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1038/srep07938\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/srep07938\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eG.A. Katsifis, N. Suchowerska, D.R. McKenzie, Optical properties of plasma-treated PEEK: Monitoring colour and crystallinity for applications in medicine and dentistry using ellipsometry. Plasma Processes Polym. \u003cb\u003e19\u003c/b\u003e(6) (2022). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1002/ppap.202100241\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/ppap.202100241\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eP.S. Yarmolenko, E.J. Moon, C. Landon, A. Manzoor, D.W. Hochman, B.L. Viglianti et al., Thresholds for thermal damage to normal tissues: an update. Int. J. Hyperth. \u003cb\u003e27\u003c/b\u003e(4), 320\u0026ndash;343 (2011). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.3109/02656736.2010.534527\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3109/02656736.2010.534527\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJ. Wang, L. Sui, J. Huang, L. Miao, Y. Nie, K. Wang et al., MoS(2)-based nanocomposites for cancer diagnosis and therapy. Bioact Mater. \u003cb\u003e6\u003c/b\u003e(11), 4209\u0026ndash;4242 (2021). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.04.021\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.04.021\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eX. Yu, S. Wu, X. Wang, M. Xu, S. Xu, Y. Yuan, Late post-operative recurrent osteosarcoma: Three case reports with a review of the literature. Oncol. Lett. \u003cb\u003e6\u003c/b\u003e(1), 23\u0026ndash;27 (2013). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.3892/ol.2013.1322\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3892/ol.2013.1322\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eA. Takeuchi, V.O. Lewis, R.L. Satcher, B.S. Moon, P.P. Lin, What are the factors that affect survival and relapse after local recurrence of osteosarcoma? Clin. Orthop. Relat. Research\u0026reg;. \u003cb\u003e472\u003c/b\u003e(10), 3188\u0026ndash;3195 (2014)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eS. Guo, Z. Song, D.K. Ji, G. Reina, J.D. Fauny, Y. Nishina et al., Combined Photothermal and Photodynamic Therapy for Cancer Treatment Using a Multifunctional Graphene Oxide. Pharmaceutics. \u003cb\u003e14\u003c/b\u003e(7) (2022). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.3390/pharmaceutics14071365\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/pharmaceutics14071365\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eS. Akter, R. Madhuvilakku, A.K. Kar, I.S. Nila, P. Liu, H. Inuzuka et al., Reactive oxygen species (ROS) in cancer: from mechanism to therapeutic implications. Signal. Transduct. Target. Ther. \u003cb\u003e11\u003c/b\u003e(1) (2026). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1038/s41392-026-02583-x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/s41392-026-02583-x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eM. Salimi, S. Mosca, B. Gardner, F. Palombo, P. Matousek, N. Stone, Nanoparticle-Mediated Photothermal Therapy Limitation in Clinical Applications Regarding Pain Management. Nanomaterials (Basel). \u003cb\u003e12\u003c/b\u003e(6) (2022). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.3390/nano12060922\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/nano12060922\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eX. Guo, M. Zhang, J. Qin, Z. Li, C. Rankl, X. Jiang et al., Revealing the Effect of Photothermal Therapy on Human Breast Cancer Cells: A Combined Study from Mechanical Properties to Membrane HSP70. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces. \u003cb\u003e15\u003c/b\u003e(18), 21965\u0026ndash;21973 (2023). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1021/acsami.3c02964\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1021/acsami.3c02964\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eA. Urazaliyeva, P. Kanabekova, A. Beisenbayev, G. Kulsharova, T. Atabaev, S. Kim et al., All organic nanomedicine for PDT-PTT combination therapy of cancer cells in hypoxia. Sci. Rep. \u003cb\u003e14\u003c/b\u003e(1), 17507 (2024). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1038/s41598-024-68077-4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/s41598-024-68077-4\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eM. Croes, van der B.C.H. Wal, H.C. Vogely, Impact of Bacterial Infections on Osteogenesis: Evidence From In Vivo Studies. J. Orthop. Res. \u003cb\u003e37\u003c/b\u003e(10), 2067\u0026ndash;2076 (2019). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1002/jor.24422\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/jor.24422\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eM.A. Rather, K. Gupta, M. Mandal, Microbial biofilm: formation, architecture, antibiotic resistance, and control strategies. Brazilian J. Microbiol. \u003cb\u003e52\u003c/b\u003e(4), 1701\u0026ndash;1718 (2021)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eY.F. Liu, P.W. Ni, Y. Huang, T. Xie, Therapeutic strategies for chronic wound infection. Chin. J. Traumatol. \u003cb\u003e25\u003c/b\u003e(1), 11\u0026ndash;16 (2022). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.cjtee.2021.07.004\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.cjtee.2021.07.004\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eS.H. Kim, J.H. Lee, S.E. Kim, S.H. Shin, H.J. Kim, S.J. Lee et al., Retrospective study of the efficacy of vascularized tissue transfer for treating antibiotic-resistant bacteria-infected wound: Comparison with clean and antibiotic-sensitive bacteria-infected wound. Med. (Baltim). \u003cb\u003e100\u003c/b\u003e(23) (2021). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1097/MD.0000000000025907\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1097/MD.0000000000025907\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. e25907\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u0026lt;10.11861471-2180-13-171.pdf\u0026amp;gt\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eC. Mao, Y. Xiang, X. Liu, Y. Zheng, K.W.K. Yeung, Z. Cui et al., Local Photothermal/Photodynamic Synergistic Therapy by Disrupting Bacterial Membrane To Accelerate Reactive Oxygen Species Permeation and Protein Leakage. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces. \u003cb\u003e11\u003c/b\u003e(19), 17902\u0026ndash;17914 (2019). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1021/acsami.9b05787\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1021/acsami.9b05787\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eT.N. Demidova, F. Gad, T. Zahra, K.P. Francis, M.R. Hamblin, Monitoring photodynamic therapy of localized infections by bioluminescence imaging of genetically engineered bacteria. J. Photochem. Photobiol B \u003cb\u003e81\u003c/b\u003e(1), 15\u0026ndash;25 (2005). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2005.05.007\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2005.05.007\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eX. Yi, Q.Y. Duan, F.G. Wu, Low-Temperature Photothermal Therapy: Strategies and Applications. Research (Wash D C) 2021(9816594 (2021). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.34133/2021/9816594\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.34133/2021/9816594\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eK. Bilici, N. Atac, A. Muti, I. Baylam, O. Dogan, A. Sennaroglu et al., Broad spectrum antibacterial photodynamic and photothermal therapy achieved with indocyanine green loaded SPIONs under near infrared irradiation. Biomater. Sci. \u003cb\u003e8\u003c/b\u003e(16), 4616\u0026ndash;4625 (2020). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1039/d0bm00821d\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1039/d0bm00821d\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eQ. Liu, F. Long, C. Zhang, Y. Liu, H. He, W. Luo, Biological reconstruction of bone defect after resection of malignant bone tumor by allograft: a single-center retrospective cohort study. World J. Surg. Oncol. \u003cb\u003e21\u003c/b\u003e(1), 234 (2023). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1186/s12957-023-03121-7\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/s12957-023-03121-7\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eL.C. Mariano, M.H.R. Fernandes, P.S. Gomes, Antimicrobial Biomaterials for the Healing of Infected Bone Tissue: A Systematic Review of Microtomographic Data on Experimental Animal Models. J. Funct. Biomater. \u003cb\u003e13\u003c/b\u003e(4) (2022). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.3390/jfb13040193\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/jfb13040193\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eA. Amaroli, S. Ravera, F. Baldini, S. Benedicenti, I. Panfoli, L. Vergani, Photobiomodulation with 808-nm diode laser light promotes wound healing of human endothelial cells through increased reactive oxygen species production stimulating mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation. Lasers Med. Sci. \u003cb\u003e34\u003c/b\u003e(3), 495\u0026ndash;504 (2019)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eS. Nomura, Y. Morimoto, H. Tsujimoto, M. Arake, M. Harada, D. Saitoh et al., Highly reliable, targeted photothermal cancer therapy combined with thermal dosimetry using a near-infrared absorbent. Sci. Rep. \u003cb\u003e10\u003c/b\u003e(1), 9765 (2020). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1038/s41598-020-66646-x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/s41598-020-66646-x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eY. Qu, K. Lu, Y. Zheng, C. Huang, G. Wang, Y. Zhang et al., Photothermal scaffolds/surfaces for regulation of cell behaviors. Bioact Mater. \u003cb\u003e8\u003c/b\u003e, 449\u0026ndash;477 (2022). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.05.052\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.05.052\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eK. Katoh, Integrin and Its Associated Proteins as a Mediator for Mechano-Signal Transduction. Biomolecules. \u003cb\u003e15\u003c/b\u003e(2) (2025). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.3390/biom15020166\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/biom15020166\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eY. Zhang, Y. He, S. Bharadwaj, N. Hammam, K. Carnagey, R. Myers et al., Tissue-specific extracellular matrix coatings for the promotion of cell proliferation and maintenance of cell phenotype. Biomaterials. \u003cb\u003e30\u003c/b\u003e(23\u0026ndash;24), 4021\u0026ndash;4028 (2009). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.biomaterials.2009.04.005\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.biomaterials.2009.04.005\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eX. Lin, S. Patil, Y.G. Gao, A. Qian, The Bone Extracellular Matrix in Bone Formation and Regeneration. Front. Pharmacol. \u003cb\u003e11\u003c/b\u003e(757) (2020). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.3389/fphar.2020.00757\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fphar.2020.00757\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eM. Biggs, R. Richards, S. McFarlane, C. Wilkinson, R. Oreffo, M. Dalby, Adhesion formation of primary human osteoblasts and the functional response of mesenchymal stem cells to 330 nm deep microgrooves. J. Royal Soc. Interface. \u003cb\u003e5\u003c/b\u003e(27), 1231\u0026ndash;1242 (2008)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eD. Dranseike, D.V. Deshmukh, M.W. Tibbitt, C. Labouesse, Cell Adhesion by Design: Engineering Tissue Culture Scaffolds With Adhesion Cues. Adv. Mater. Interfaces. (2026). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1002/admi.202500960\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/admi.202500960\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eS. Chen, C.J. Gil, L. Ning, L. Jin, L. Perez, G. Kabboul et al., Adhesive Tissue Engineered Scaffolds: Mechanisms and Applications. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. \u003cb\u003e9\u003c/b\u003e(683079) (2021). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.3389/fbioe.2021.683079\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fbioe.2021.683079\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eA. Carmignani, T. Yamazaki, M. Battaglini, C.Q. Vu, A. Marino, S. Takayanagi-Kiya et al., Cellular Activity Modulation Mediated by Near Infrared-Irradiated Polydopamine Nanoparticles: In Vitro and Ex Vivo Investigation. ACS Nano. \u003cb\u003e19\u003c/b\u003e(17), 16267\u0026ndash;16286 (2025). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1021/acsnano.5c04181\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1021/acsnano.5c04181\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eS. Vimalraj, Alkaline phosphatase: Structure, expression and its function in bone mineralization. Gene. \u003cb\u003e754\u003c/b\u003e(144855) (2020). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.gene.2020.144855\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.gene.2020.144855\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eS. Ansari, K. Ito, S. Hofmann, Alkaline Phosphatase Activity of Serum Affects Osteogenic Differentiation Cultures. ACS Omega. \u003cb\u003e7\u003c/b\u003e(15), 12724\u0026ndash;12733 (2022). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1021/acsomega.1c07225\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1021/acsomega.1c07225\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eV. Palmieri, M. Barba, Di L. Pietro, C. Conti, De M. Spirito, W. Lattanzi et al., Graphene Oxide Induced Osteogenesis Quantification by In-Situ 2D-Fluorescence Spectroscopy. Int. J. Mol. Sci. \u003cb\u003e19\u003c/b\u003e(11) (2018). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.3390/ijms19113336\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/ijms19113336\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eM. Koblenzer, M. Weiler, A. Fragoulis, S. Rutten, T. Pufe, H. Jahr, Physiological Mineralization during In Vitro Osteogenesis in a Biomimetic Spheroid Culture Model. Cells. \u003cb\u003e11\u003c/b\u003e(17) (2022). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.3390/cells11172702\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/cells11172702\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eF. Simunovic, G. Finkenzeller, Vascularization Strategies in Bone Tissue Engineering. Cells. \u003cb\u003e10\u003c/b\u003e(7) (2021). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.3390/cells10071749\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/cells10071749\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eS. Chen, X. Zhou, T. Li, C. He, Vascularization and Innervation for Bone Tissue Engineering. Acc. Mater. Res. \u003cb\u003e5\u003c/b\u003e(9), 1121\u0026ndash;1133 (2024). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1021/accountsmr.4c00165\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1021/accountsmr.4c00165\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eX. Ren, Y. Feng, J. Guo, H. Wang, Q. Li, J. Yang et al., Surface modification and endothelialization of biomaterials as potential scaffolds for vascular tissue engineering applications. Chem. Soc. Rev. \u003cb\u003e44\u003c/b\u003e(15), 5680\u0026ndash;5742 (2015)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eB.M. Whited, M.N. Rylander, The influence of electrospun scaffold topography on endothelial cell morphology, alignment, and adhesion in response to fluid flow. Biotechnol. Bioeng. \u003cb\u003e111\u003c/b\u003e(1), 184\u0026ndash;195 (2014). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1002/bit.24995\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/bit.24995\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eX. Chen, Y.J. Park, M. Kang, S.K. Kang, J. Koo, S.M. Shinde et al., CVD-grown monolayer MoS(2) in bioabsorbable electronics and biosensors. Nat. Commun. \u003cb\u003e9\u003c/b\u003e(1), 1690 (2018). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1038/s41467-018-03956-9\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/s41467-018-03956-9\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eM. Chen, M. Ren, X. Liu, Z. Wang, Y. Shi, Z. Wu et al., Synergistic enhancement of angiogenesis and osseointegration in 3D-printed porous polyetheretherketone scaffolds using biomimetic coatings of bone morphogenetic protein-2/fibronectin. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. \u003cb\u003e297\u003c/b\u003e, 139876 (2025). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2025.139876\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2025.139876\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Scheme 1","content":"\n\u003cp\u003eScheme 1 is available in the Supplementary Files section.\u003c/p\u003e\n"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"nano-convergence","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"ncon","sideBox":"Learn more about [Nano Convergence](https://www.springer.com/journal/40580)","snPcode":"40580","submissionUrl":"https://www.editorialmanager.com/ncon/default2.aspx","title":"Nano Convergence","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Open","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"3D printing, PEEK scaffold, 2D monolayer MoS2, Dual-phototherapy, Osteosarcoma treatment, Antibacterial activity, Vascularized bone regeneration","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9575873/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9575873/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eOsteosarcoma has a poor prognosis owing to its aggressive metastasis and high recurrence rates. Consequently, recurrence due to residual cancer cells is common even after surgical resection, necessitating structural and functional reconstruction of extensive bone defects. Particularly for irregular defects, site-specific design is essential to ensure anatomical conformity, and there remains an urgent need for theragenerative approach which simultaneously provides structural reconstruction and functional eradication of residual cancer cells. Herein, a 3D-printed theragenerative polyetheretherketone (PEEK) scaffold is presented, in which a patient-specific structure is constructed from fabricated PEEK filaments and subsequently integrated with biofunctional 2D molybdenum disulfide (MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e) as a surface interface to impart enhanced bioactivity and photo-responsiveness. MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e was synthesized as a two-dimensional monolayer based on a molybdenum dioxide nanoparticle precursor via nanoseed-initiated atmospheric pressure chemical vapor deposition (APCVD) and then integrated onto the 3D-printed PEEK using a polymer-assisted transfer method. The fabricated 2D MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e-conformal 3D-printed PEEK scaffold enabled simultaneous photothermal and photodynamic therapy through MoS\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e-based photoresponsive properties. Under dual-wavelength irradiation, this combined phototherapy effectively induced pronounced cancer cell apoptosis and exhibited antibacterial performance through the synergistic effects of localized hyperthermia and reactive oxygen species generation. In contrast, under the same photothermal stimulation, pre-osteoblasts and vascular endothelial cells exhibited enhanced attachment, proliferation, and differentiation. Therefore, this theragenerative system represents a promising platform capable of simultaneously achieving residual cancer tumor suppression, infection control, and tissue regeneration, thereby offering a patient-specific bone reconstruction strategy after osteosarcoma resection.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"2D MoS2-Conformal 3D-Printed Platform for Dual Phototherapy and Bone Regeneration","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-05-15 16:18:13","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9575873/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"","date":"2026-05-07T02:51:37+00:00","index":0,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2026-05-06T15:39:24+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2026-05-02T17:33:15+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Nano Convergence","date":"2026-04-30T06:23:03+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"nano-convergence","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"ncon","sideBox":"Learn more about [Nano Convergence](https://www.springer.com/journal/40580)","snPcode":"40580","submissionUrl":"https://www.editorialmanager.com/ncon/default2.aspx","title":"Nano Convergence","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Open","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"eb62af28-1172-4ca4-b58b-319463ddb5c5","owner":[],"postedDate":"May 15th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"","date":"2026-05-07T02:51:37+00:00","index":0,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2026-05-06T15:39:24+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2026-05-02T17:33:15+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Nano Convergence","date":"2026-04-30T06:23:03+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-16T01:27:14+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-05-15 16:18:13","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-9575873","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-9575873","identity":"rs-9575873","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}