Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40006514›Full record

ReviewPharmaceutics2025

Exosome Source Matters: A Comprehensive Review from the Perspective of Diverse Cellular Origins.

Yiru Chen, Weikun Qi, Zhenghao Wang, Feng Niu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pharmaceutics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Two-StepBiology · 2026
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Vaccine Adjuvants and Delivery Systems: A Comprehensive Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  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

4 authors.

Yiru ChenPlastic Surgery Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, No. 33 Badachu Road, Shijingshan, Beijing 100144, China.ORCID 0000-0003-4663-8272
Weikun QiPlastic Surgery Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, No. 33 Badachu Road, Shijingshan, Beijing 100144, China.
Zhenghao WangPlastic Surgery Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, No. 33 Badachu Road, Shijingshan, Beijing 100144, China.
Feng NiuPlastic Surgery Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, No. 33 Badachu Road, Shijingshan, Beijing 100144, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Exosomes have emerged as promising therapeutic agents in regenerative medicine. This review introduces a novel cell type-oriented perspective to systematically analyze exosomal properties in regenerative therapies. To our knowledge, this review is the first to comprehensively compare exosomes based on cellular source type, offering unprecedented insights into selecting optimal exosome producers for targeted regenerative applications. Factors beyond cellular origin influencing exosomal therapeutic efficacy, such as donor sites and collection methods, are also explored here. By synthesizing key advances, we propose promising research directions in the end. We aim to accelerate the development of more effective exosome-based regenerative therapies and highlight underexplored directions in this rapidly evolving field.

Indexed as

cellular originexosomeextracellular vesicleregenerative medicine

Identifiers

PMID40006514
PMCPMC11858990

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.