ReviewRNA biology2025
Relevance of RNA to the therapeutic efficacy of mesenchymal stromal/stem cells extracellular vesicles.
Review in RNA biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Extracellular Vesicles in Cardiovascular Disease: Intercellular Signaling, Liquid Biopsy Biomarkers, and Therapeutic Translation.Circulation research · 2026Review
- The Mechanistic Review of the Molecular Interface of RNA-Loaded Extracellular Vesicles: Redefining Targeted Therapy for Autoimmune Disorders.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Article
- Extracellular Vesicle-Derived Bioactive Molecules for Corneal and Ocular Surface Regeneration.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Addressing barriers to clinical translation of extracellular vesicle therapeutics.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2025Article
- Rethinking miRNAs in MSC-sEV therapeutics: implications for manufacture, mechanism of action, and development of robust potency CQAs.Extracellular vesicles and circulating nucleic acids · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedCorrection.2025
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mesenchymal Stromal/Stem Cells (MSCs) are among the most frequently studied cell types in clinical trials, and their small extracellular vesicles (sEVs) are now being extensively investigated for therapeutic applications. The RNA cargo of MSC-sEVs, particularly miRNAs and mRNAs, is widely believed to be a key therapeutic component of these vesicles. In this review, we critically examine using first principles and peer-reviewed literature, whether MSC- extracellular vesicles (MSC-EVs) can deliver sufficient quantity of functional miRNA or mRNA to target compartments within recipient cells to elicit a pharmacological response. Several RNA sequencing studies reveal that miRNAs are underrepresented in the small RNA population of MSC-sEVs compared to the parent MSCs. Additionally, the majority of miRNAs are mature forms that are not associated with Argonaute (AGO) proteins, essential for their function in RNA-induced silencing complexes (RISCs). Compounding this, cellular uptake of EVs is generally inefficient, with less than 1% being internalized, and only a fraction of these reaching the cytosol. This suggests that EVs may not deliver miRNAs in sufficient quantities to meaningfully interact with AGO proteins, either through canonical or non-canonical pathways, or with other proteins like Toll-like receptors (TLRs). Further, MSC-sEV RNAs are generally small, with sizes less than 500 nucleotides indicating that any mRNA present is likely fragmented as the average mammalian mRNA is approximately 2000 nucleotides, a fact confirmed by RNA sequencing data. Together, these findings challenge the notion that RNA, particularly miRNAs and mRNAs, are primary therapeutic attributes of MSC-sEVs.
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.