ReviewNanoscale2024
Genetically engineered cell-derived nanovesicles for cancer immunotherapy.
Review in Nanoscale, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biomimetic and personalized nanovaccines in cancer immunotherapy: Design innovations, translational challenges, and future directions.Journal of advanced research · 2026Review
- Effect of gut bacterial extracellular vesicles on angiogenic potential and vascular integrity: positive and negative aspects.Inflammation research : official journal of the European Histamine Research Society ... [et al.] · 2026Review
- Exosome-mimetic nanocarriers in cancer diagnosis and drug delivery: engineering strategies, functional biomimicry, safety considerations, and clinical translation.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2026Review
- Autophagy-enhanced hybrid pyroptotic vesicles as personalized vaccines for cancer immunotherapy.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2026Article
- Application of dendritic cell extracellular vesicles as a valid nanoparticle platform for cancer therapies: a narrative review.Stem cell research & therapy · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The emergence of immunotherapy has marked a new epoch in cancer treatment, presenting substantial clinical benefits. Extracellular vesicles (EVs), as natural nanocarriers, can deliver biologically active agents in cancer therapy with their inherent biocompatibility and negligible immunogenicity. However, natural EVs have limitations such as inadequate targeting capability, low loading efficacy, and unpredictable side effects. Through progress in genetic engineering, EVs have been modified for enhanced delivery of immunomodulatory agents and antigen presentation with specific cancer targeting ability, deepening the role of EVs in cancer immunotherapy. This review briefly describes typical EV sources, isolation methods, and adjustable targeting of EVs. Furthermore, this review highlights the genetic engineering strategies developed for delivering immunomodulatory agents and antigen presentation in EV-based systems. The prospects and challenges of genetically engineered EVs as cancer immunotherapy in clinical translation are also discussed.
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.