Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39427198›Full record

ArticleJournal of nanobiotechnology2024

Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG-derived extracellular vesicles promote wound healing via miR-21-5p-mediated re-epithelization and angiogenesis.

Juan Wang, Xiaojie Li, Xinyue Zhao, Siqi Yuan, Hanyu Dou, Ting Cheng, Taomin Huang, Zhi Lv, Yidong Tu, Yejiao Shi and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of nanobiotechnology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing 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

39 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. The dual role of the microbiome in chronic wound management.Cell communication and signaling : CCS · 2026
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

11 authors.

Juan Wang *Institute of Geriatrics (Shanghai University), Affiliated Nantong Hospital of Shanghai University (The Sixth People's Hospital of Nantong), School of Medicine, Shanghai University, Nantong, 226011, China.
Xiaojie Li *Institute of Geriatrics (Shanghai University), Affiliated Nantong Hospital of Shanghai University (The Sixth People's Hospital of Nantong), School of Medicine, Shanghai University, Nantong, 226011, China.
Xinyue ZhaoInstitute of Geriatrics (Shanghai University), Affiliated Nantong Hospital of Shanghai University (The Sixth People's Hospital of Nantong), School of Medicine, Shanghai University, Nantong, 226011, China.
Siqi YuanInstitute of Geriatrics (Shanghai University), Affiliated Nantong Hospital of Shanghai University (The Sixth People's Hospital of Nantong), School of Medicine, Shanghai University, Nantong, 226011, China.
Hanyu DouInstitute of Geriatrics (Shanghai University), Affiliated Nantong Hospital of Shanghai University (The Sixth People's Hospital of Nantong), School of Medicine, Shanghai University, Nantong, 226011, China.
Ting ChengInstitute of Translational Medicine, Shanghai University, Shanghai, 200444, China.
Taomin HuangEye & ENT Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200031, China.
Zhi LvShanghai Inoherb R&D Center, Shanghai, 200444, China.
Yidong TuShanghai Inoherb R&D Center, Shanghai, 200444, China.
Yejiao ShiInstitute of Translational Medicine, Shanghai University, Shanghai, 200444, China. sh10yj@shu.edu.cn.
Xiaolei DingInstitute of Geriatrics (Shanghai University), Affiliated Nantong Hospital of Shanghai University (The Sixth People's Hospital of Nantong), School of Medicine, Shanghai University, Nantong, 226011, China. xlding@shu.edu.cn.

Funding

National Key Research and Development Program of China 2023YFC2509000National Natural Science Foundation of China 82204450National Natural Science Foundation of China 82272278
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Extracellular vesicles (EVs), especially those derived from stem cells, have emerged as a novel treatment for promoting wound healing in regenerative medicine. However, the clinical application of mammalian cells-derived EVs is hindered by their high cost and low yields. Inspired by the ability of EVs to mediate interkingdom communication, we explored the therapeutic potential of EVs released by the probiotic strain Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG) in skin wound healing and elucidated the underlying mechanism involved. Using full-thickness skin wound-healing mouse models, we found that LGG-EVs accelerated wound healing procedures, including increased re-epithelialization and promoted angiogenesis. Using in vitro experiments, we further demonstrated that LGG-EVs boosted the proliferation and migration capacities of both epithelial and endothelial cells, as well as promoted endothelial tube formation. miRNA profiling analysis revealed that miR-21-5p was highly enriched in LGG-EVs and LGG-EV treatment significantly increased miR-21-5p level in recipient cells. Mechanically, LGG-EVs induced regulatory effects via miR-21-5p mediated metabolic signaling rewiring. Our results suggest that EVs derived from LGG could serve as a promising candidate for accelerating wound healing and possibly for treating chronic and impaired healing conditions.

Indexed as

Extracellular VesiclesLacticaseibacillus rhamnosusMicroRNAsNeovascularization, PhysiologicWound HealingAngiogenesisAnimalsCell MovementCell ProliferationEndothelial CellsHumansMaleMiceMice, Inbred C57BLProbioticsRe-EpithelializationMicroRNAsMIRN21 microRNA, humanMIRN21 microRNA, mouseBacteriaExtracellular vesiclesLactobacillus rhamnosus GGmiRNA sequenceWound healing

Identifiers

PMID39427198
PMCPMC11490139

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.