ArticleMolecular oncology2026
Optimization of seminal extracellular vesicle isolation protocols for cancer biomarker analysis using proteomic profiling.
Article in Molecular oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Seminal extracellular vesicles (EVs) hold promise as a source of biomarkers for urogenital cancers. In this study, small seminal EVs were isolated from healthy donors by size-exclusion chromatography (SEC) and three ultracentrifugation (UC) protocols, with or without filtration. EV samples prepared by UC had a higher abundance of typical EV-related molecules such as CD9, CD81, and Alix, compared to SEC preparations. However, ribosomal and ER-related proteins were more enriched in SEC samples. Furthermore, the level of several nonvesicular proteins and/or EV-corona proteins was higher in SEC samples. The addition of a filtration step in the UC protocols also reduced the abundance of these proteins. Finally, we found that the isolation protocol affected the presence of prostate cancer-specific proteins in the EV samples, with membrane proteins such as FOLH1, TMPRSS2, and PSCA enriched in samples prepared by UC. In conclusion, our results suggest that SEC and UC enrich for different EV populations, which should be considered when analyzing cancer biomarkers. Moreover, UC samples contained fewer nonvesicular proteins and/or EV-corona proteins, which may enable a more precise detection of EV-based cancer biomarkers.
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.