Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 622

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparative proteomics evaluation of plasma exosome isolation techniques and assessment of the stability of exosomes in normal human blood plasma

Kalra, Hina, Adda, Christopher G., Liem, Michael, Ang, Ching‐Seng, Mechler, Adam, Simpson, Richard J., Hulett, Mark D., Mathivanan, Suresh·2013·PROTEOMICS

Abstract

Exosomes are nanovesicles released by a variety of cells and are detected in body fluids including blood. Recent studies have highlighted the critical application of exosomes as personalized targeted drug delivery vehicles and as reservoirs of disease biomarkers. While these research applications have created significant interest and can be translated into practice, the stability of exosomes needs to be assessed and exosome isolation protocols from blood plasma need to be optimized. To optimize methods to isolate exosomes from blood plasma, we performed a comparative evaluation of three exosome isolation techniques (differential centrifugation coupled with ultracentrifugation, epithelial cell adhesion molecule immunoaffinity pull‐down, and OptiPrep TM density gradient separation) using normal human plasma. Based on MS, Western blotting and microscopy results, we found that the OptiPrep TM density gradient method was superior in isolating pure exosomal populations, devoid of highly abundant plasma proteins. In addition, we assessed the stability of exosomes in plasma over 90 days under various storage conditions. Western blotting analysis using the exosomal marker, TSG101, revealed that exosomes are stable for 90 days. Interestingly, in the context of cellular uptake, the isolated exosomes were able to fuse with target cells revealing that they were indeed biologically active.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/pmic.201300282

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 7 references

Cited by

See all 622

Metadata

Authors
Kalra, H., Adda, C. G., Liem, M., Ang, C., Mechler, A., Simpson, R. J., Hulett, M. D., & Mathivanan, S.
Venue
PROTEOMICS
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-10-18
Volume
13
Issue
22
Pages
3354-3364
ISSN
  • 1615-9853 (ISSN-L)
  • 1615-9861
OpenAlex
W2064555156
Cited by
622
References
7
FWCI
14.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparative proteomics evaluation of plasma exosome isolation techniques and assessment of the stability of exosomes in normal human blood plasma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/pmic.201300282
The paper
Kalra, H., Adda, C. G., Liem, M., Ang, C., Mechler, A., Simpson, R. J., Hulett, M. D., & Mathivanan, S. (2013). Comparative proteomics evaluation of plasma exosome isolation techniques and assessment of the stability of exosomes in normal human blood plasma. PROTEOMICS. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmic.201300282

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.