Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41551613›Full record

ArticleExtracellular vesicles and circulating nucleic acids2025

MISEV and MIQE: integrating domain-specific and general standards to strengthen extracellular vesicle biomarker research.

Michael W Pfaffl, Mikael Kubista, Jo Vandesompele, Stephen A Bustin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Extracellular vesicles and circulating nucleic acids, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. 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.

Michael W PfafflAnimal Physiology and Immunology, School of Life Sciences Weihenstephan, Technical University of Munich, Freising 85354, Germany.
Mikael KubistaInstitute of Biotechnology CAS, Czech Academy of Science, Prague 252 50, Czech Republic.
Jo VandesompeleDepartment of Biomolecular Medicine, Ghent University, Ghent 9000, Belgium.
Stephen A BustinMedical Technology Research Centre, Anglia Ruskin University, Chelmsford CM1 1SQ, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Extracellular vesicles (EVs) have significant potential as therapeutic agents and as sources of diagnostic, predictive, and prognostic nucleic acid biomarkers. However, variability in EV workflows and inadequate standardization of downstream analysis pose major obstacles to reproducibility. The MISEV (Minimal Information for Studies of Extracellular Vesicles) guidelines provide essential domain-specific recommendations for EV isolation, characterization, analysis, nomenclature, and reporting, but deliberately refrain from prescribing methods for the molecular quantification of EV cargo. Among the analytical platforms used in EV studies, quantitative reverse transcription PCR (RT-qPCR) is the most critical method for validating and quantifying EV-associated RNA. The recently revised MIQE (Minimum Information for Publication of Quantitative Real-Time PCR Experiments) 2.0 guidelines offer a detailed foundation for ensuring analytical validity in RT-qPCR-based quantitative applications. The proposed model of harmonizing general and domain-specific guidelines provides a scalable blueprint for improving reproducibility across complex biomarker development workflows in molecular diagnostics.

Indexed as

analytical validitybiomarker researchextracellular vesiclesMIQEMISEVreproducibilityRT-qPCRstandardization

Identifiers

PMID41551613
PMCPMC12809392

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.