4.8 Review

New Technologies for Analysis of Extracellular Vesicles

Journal

CHEMICAL REVIEWS
Volume 118, Issue 4, Pages 1917-1950

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.7b00534

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NIH [R21-CA205322, R01-HL113156, R01-CA204019, R01-EB010011, R01-EB00462605A1, P01-CA069246, CA179563, K99-CA201248-02]
  2. Liz Tilberis Award-Ovarian Cancer Research Fund
  3. Institute for Pancreatic Cancer Research at MGH
  4. Lustgarten Foundation
  5. MGH Scholar Fund
  6. National Research Foundation of Korea [NRF-2017M3A9B4025699, NRF-2017M3A9B4025709]
  7. Institute for Basic Science [IBS-R026-D1]
  8. Singapore government [R-722-000-005-133, NMRC/TCR/016-NNI/2016]
  9. NUS Early Career Research Award
  10. National Research Foundation of Korea [2017M3A9B4025709] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are diverse, nanoscale membrane vesicles actively released by cells. Similar-sized vesicles can be further classified (e.g., exosomes, microvesicles) based on their biogenesis, size, and biophysical properties. Although initially thought to be cellular debris, and thus under-appreciated, EVs are now increasingly recognized as important vehicles of intercellular communication and circulating biomarkers for disease diagnoses and prognosis. Despite their clinical potential, the lack of sensitive preparatory and analytical technologies for EVs poses a barrier to clinical translation. New analytical platforms including molecular ones are thus actively being developed to address these challenges. Recent advances in the field are expected to have far-reaching impact in both basic and translational studies. This article aims to present a comprehensive and critical overview of emerging analytical technologies for EV detection and their clinical applications.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available