Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39149774›Full record

ArticleACS applied materials & interfaces2024

Improving the Purity of Extracellular Vesicles by Removal of Lipoproteins from Size Exclusion Chromatography- and Ultracentrifugation-Processed Samples Using Glycosaminoglycan-Functionalized Magnetic Beads.

Cheng-Yu Chou, Po-Chieh Chiang, Chih-Chi Li, Jheng-Wun Chang, Po-Han Lu, Wei-Fan Hsu, Li-Chun Chang, Jung-Lung Hsu, Ming-Shiang Wu, Andrew M Wo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ACS applied materials & interfaces, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Novel Liquid Biopsy in Gastrointestinal Cancers.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  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

10 authors.

Cheng-Yu ChouInstitute of Applied Mechanics, National Taiwan University, 1 Roosevelt Road, Sec. 4, Taipei 106319, Taiwan.ORCID 0009-0004-5736-4195
Po-Chieh ChiangReliance Biosciences, Inc., New Taipei City 231023, Taiwan.
Chih-Chi LiGraduate Institute of Biomedical Electronics and Bioinformatics, National Taiwan University, Taipei 106319, Taiwan.
Jheng-Wun ChangInstitute of Applied Mechanics, National Taiwan University, 1 Roosevelt Road, Sec. 4, Taipei 106319, Taiwan.
Po-Han LuInstitute of Applied Mechanics, National Taiwan University, 1 Roosevelt Road, Sec. 4, Taipei 106319, Taiwan.
Wei-Fan HsuInstitute of Applied Mechanics, National Taiwan University, 1 Roosevelt Road, Sec. 4, Taipei 106319, Taiwan.
Li-Chun ChangDepartment of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei 100225, Taiwan.
Jung-Lung HsuDepartment of Neurology, New Taipei Municipal TuCheng Hospital, New Taipei City 236017, Taiwan.
Ming-Shiang WuDepartment of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei 100225, Taiwan.
Andrew M WoInstitute of Applied Mechanics, National Taiwan University, 1 Roosevelt Road, Sec. 4, Taipei 106319, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-1633-4019

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are present in blood at much lower concentrations (5-6 orders of magnitude) compared to lipoprotein particles (LP). Because LP and EV overlap in size and density, isolating high-purity EVs is a significant challenge. While the current two-step sequential EV isolation process using size-expression chromatography (SEC) followed by a density gradient (DG) achieves high purity, the time-consuming ultracentrifugation (UC) step in DG hinders workflow efficiency. This paper introduces an optimized magnetic bead reagent, LipoMin, functionalized with glycosaminoglycans (GAGs), as a rapid alternative for LP removal during the second-step process in about 10 minutes. We evaluated LipoMin's efficacy on two sample types: (a) EV fractions isolated by size exclusion chromatography (SEC + LipoMin) and (b) the pellet obtained from ultracentrifugation (UC + LipoMin). The workflow is remarkably simple, involving a 10 min incubation with LipoMin followed by magnetic separation of the LP-depleted EV-containing supernatant. Results from enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) revealed that LipoMin removes 98.2% ApoB from SEC EV fractions, comparable to the LP removal ability of DG in the SEC + DG two-step process. Importantly, the EV yield (CD81 ELISA) remained at 93.0% and Western blot analysis confirmed that key EV markers, flotillin and CD81, were not compromised. Recombinant EV (rEV), an EV reference standard, was spiked into SEC EV fractions and recovered 89% of CD81 protein. For UC + LipoMin, ApoA1 decreased by 76.5% while retaining 90.7% of CD81. Notably, both colorectal cancer (CRC) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) samples processed by SEC + LipoMin and UC + LipoMin displayed clear expression of relevant EV and clinical markers. With a 10 min workflow (resulting in a 96% time saving compared to the traditional method), the LipoMin reagent offers a rapid and efficient alternative to DG for LP depletion, paving the way for a streamlined SEC + LipoMin two-step EV isolation process.

Indexed as

Chromatography, GelExtracellular VesiclesGlycosaminoglycansLipoproteinsUltracentrifugationHumansGlycosaminoglycansLipoproteinsexosomesextracellular vesiclesglycosaminoglycansLipoMinlipoproteinssecond-stepsize exclusion chromatography

Identifiers

PMID39149774
PMCPMC11367580

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.