ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2024
Comparison of nanovesicles derived from
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in Research onInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Green Nanodrugs: Research Progress and Challenges of Plant-Derived Nanovesicles in Tumor Treatment.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Non-targeted metabolomics reveals tissue-specific metabolic profiling and antioxidant - related markers inFrontiers in plant science · 2026Article
- Exosomes derived from Panax notoginseng promote osteogenic differentiation of rBMSCs via the PI3K/AKT signaling pathway.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: Plant-derived nanovesicles have emerged as potential agents for combating tumors. In this study, we investigated the inhibitory effects of Methods: We isolated PnNVs from Results: Our findings revealed that s_PnNVs exhibited lower potential but had the highest cellular uptake efficiency, whereas m_PnNVs were characterized by the smallest size and lowest cellular uptake efficiency. Notably, m_PnNVs demonstrated the most effective inhibition of squamous cell carcinoma growth and migration. Compositional analyses showed that PnNVs were rich in proteins and contained lower levels of RNA, with l_PnNVs having the highest protein content. Furthermore, untargeted metabolomics analysis revealed a significant increase in the expression of specific antitumour-related metabolites in m_PnNVs compared to s_PnNVs and l_PnNVs. Conclusion: Overall, our results underscore the influence of plant tuber size on the bioactivity of the nanovesicles from which they are derived, emphasizing its importance for experimental design and study reproducibility.
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.