Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35933395›Full record

ArticleBiomarker research2022

Selective isolation of extracellular vesicles from minimally processed human plasma as a translational strategy for liquid biopsies.

Diogo Fortunato, Stavros Giannoukakos, Ana Giménez-Capitán, Michael Hackenberg, Miguel A Molina-Vila, Nataša Zarovni

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomarker research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Stem cell extracellular vesicles for neuropsychiatric disorders and translation.Extracellular vesicles and circulating nucleic acids · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Diogo FortunatoExosomics SpA, 53100, Siena, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2732-477X
Stavros GiannoukakosDepartment of Genetics, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
Ana Giménez-CapitánLaboratory of Oncology, Pangaea Oncology, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2575-1225
Michael HackenbergDepartment of Genetics, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2248-3114
Miguel A Molina-VilaLaboratory of Oncology, Pangaea Oncology, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8866-9881
Nataša ZarovniExosomics SpA, 53100, Siena, Italy. nzarovni@exosomics.eu.
Universidad de Granada · ESEpigenomics (Germany) · DE

Funding

H2020 Future and Emerging Technologies 952183H2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions 765492
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntercellular communication is mediated by extracellular vesicles (EVs), as they enclose selectively packaged biomolecules that can be horizontally transferred from donor to recipient cells. Because all cells constantly generate and recycle EVs, they provide accurate timed snapshots of individual pathophysiological status. Since blood plasma circulates through the whole body, it is often the biofluid of choice for biomarker detection in EVs. Blood collection is easy and minimally invasive, yet reproducible procedures to obtain pure EV samples from circulating biofluids are still lacking. Here, we addressed central aspects of EV immunoaffinity isolation from simple and complex matrices, such as plasma.

methodsCell-generated EV spike-in models were isolated and purified by size-exclusion chromatography, stained with cellular dyes and characterized by nano flow cytometry. Fluorescently-labelled spike-in EVs emerged as reliable, high-throughput and easily measurable readouts, which were employed to optimize our EV immunoprecipitation strategy and evaluate its performance. Plasma-derived EVs were captured and detected using this straightforward protocol, sequentially combining isolation and staining of specific surface markers, such as CD9 or CD41. Multiplexed digital transcript detection data was generated using the Nanostring nCounter platform and evaluated through a dedicated bioinformatics pipeline.

resultsBeads with covalently-conjugated antibodies on their surface outperformed streptavidin-conjugated beads, coated with biotinylated antibodies, in EV immunoprecipitation. Fluorescent EV spike recovery evidenced that target EV subpopulations can be efficiently retrieved from plasma, and that their enrichment is dependent not only on complex matrix composition, but also on the EV surface phenotype. Finally, mRNA profiling experiments proved that distinct EV subpopulations can be captured by directly targeting different surface markers. Furthermore, EVs isolated with anti-CD61 beads enclosed mRNA expression patterns that might be associated to early-stage lung cancer, in contrast with EVs captured through CD9, CD63 or CD81. The differential clinical value carried within each distinct EV subset highlights the advantages of selective isolation.

conclusionsThis EV isolation protocol facilitated the extraction of clinically useful information from plasma. Compatible with common downstream analytics, it is a readily implementable research tool, tailored to provide a truly translational solution in routine clinical workflows, fostering the inclusion of EVs in novel liquid biopsy settings.

Indexed as

Early-stage cancerEnrichmentExtracellular vesicleImmunoprecipitationLiquid biopsyPlasmaPlatelet

Identifiers

PMID35933395
PMCPMC9357340
OpenAlexW4290473321

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.