ArticleExtracellular vesicle2025
Systematic characterization of mammalian extracellular vesicles using nano-flow cytometry.
Article in Extracellular vesicle, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of Tetraspanins in Extracellular Vesicle Bioengineering.Small science · 2026Article
- From bench to bedside: the promise and roadblocks of extracellular vesicle therapeutics.Theranostics · 2026Review
- Conditioned Media-Derived Tumor Extracellular Vesicles: Bridging Molecular Insights and Therapeutic Applications in Oncology.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnologyReview
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
Abstract
Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are nanoscale, membrane-enclosed particles that transport bioactive cargo between cells and are increasingly studied for their potential in diagnostic and therapeutic applications. Advancing EV-based technologies for these applications depend on the ability to consistently isolate and characterize vesicle populations with defined biophysical and molecular properties. Efforts to obtain pure EV populations from cell culture systems are limited by inherent EV heterogeneity, exogenous particle contamination introduced by media supplements, and the co-isolation of non-vesicular contaminants. These challenges are further compounded by the limitations of conventional EV characterization platforms, which often lack the resolution to distinguish EVs from similarly sized non-vesicular particles or to capture molecular heterogeneity at the single-vesicle scale. Together, these limitations highlight the need for analytical approaches capable of resolving EV heterogeneity and enabling comparisons across EV production conditions and isolation strategies. In this study, we used nano-flow cytometry (nFCM) for high-resolution analysis of individual EVs, enabling simultaneous measurement of particle size, concentration, and tetraspanin expression. This approach revealed substantial amounts of exogenous particle contamination in media supplements commonly used to culture EV-producing cells, and quantified differences in EV purity and yield between methods used to isolate EVs from the media of the producing cells. Additionally, analysis of EVs derived from HEK293T, U-87 MG, and hMSC mammalian cell cultures revealed cell type-specific differences in EV production and expression of tetraspanin markers CD9, CD63, and CD81. Collectively, these results demonstrate that careful selection of media compositions and isolation strategies, combined with nFCM analytical techniques can resolve biological differences in EV populations.
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.