ArticleBMC urology2021
Isolation and characterization of urine microvesicles from prostate cancer patients: different approaches, different visions.
Article in BMC urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Urinary exosomal microRNAs in Kawasaki disease and their changes after treatment.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- Multimodal urinary biomarker panel achieves superior prostate cancer detection accuracy and reduces unnecessary biopsies.Translational oncology · 2026Article
- Therapeutic potential of urinary extracellular vesicles in delivering functional proteins and modulating gene expression for genetic kidney disease.Biomaterials · 2025Article
- Engineered Extracellular Vesicles for Targeted Paclitaxel Delivery in Cancer Therapy: Advances, Challenges, and Prospects.Cellular and molecular bioengineering · 2025Review
- Shining the Path of Precision Diagnostic: Advancements in Photonic Sensors for Liquid Biopsy.Biosensors · 2025Review
- Urine Extracellular Vesicles Size Subsets as Lupus Nephritis Biomarkers.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Deciphering disease through glycan codes: leveraging lectin microarrays for clinical insights.Acta biochimica et biophysica Sinica · 2024Review
- Urinary extracellular vesicles in childhood kidney diseases.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2024Review
- The Diagnostic and Prognostic Value of Plasmatic Exosome Count in Cancer Patients and in Patients with Other Pathologies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Prostate cancer-derived small extracellular vesicle proteins: the hope in diagnosis, prognosis, and therapeutics.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2023Review
- Article
- Review
- Standardising the preanalytical reporting of biospecimens to improve reproducibility in extracellular vesicle research - A GEIVEX study.Journal of extracellular biology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBecause of their specific and biologically relevant cargo, urine extracellular vesicles (EVs) constitute a valuable source of potential non-invasive biomarkers that could support the clinical decision-making to improve the management of prostate cancer (PCa) patients. Different EV isolation methods differ in terms of complexity and yield, conditioning, as consequence, the analytical result.
methodsThe aim of this study was to compare three different isolation methods for urine EVs: ultracentrifugation (UC), size exclusion chromatography (SEC), and a commercial kit (Exolute® Urine Kit). Urine samples were collected from 6 PCa patients and 4 healthy donors. After filtered through 0.22 µm filters, urine was divided in 3 equal volumes to perform EVs isolation with each of the three approaches. Isolated EVs were characterized by spectrophotometric protein quantification, nanoparticle tracking analysis, transmission electron microscopy, AlphaScreen Technology, and whole miRNA Transcriptome.
resultsOur results showed that UC and SEC provided better results in terms of EVs yield and purity than Exolute®, non-significant differences were observed in terms of EV-size. Interestingly, luminescent AlphaScreen assay demonstrated a significant enrichment of CD9 and CD63 positive microvesicles in SEC and UC methods compared with Exolute®. This heterogeneity was also demonstrated in terms of miRNA content indicating that the best correlation was observed between UC and SEC.
conclusionsOur study highlights the importance of standardizing the urine EV isolation methods to guaranty the analytical reproducibility necessary for their implementation in a clinical setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.