Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 396

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 52 of the 52 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Exosome Total Isolation Chip

Open access
Liu, Fei, Vermesh, Ophir, Mani, Vigneshwaran, Ge, Tianjia J., Madsen, Steven J., Sabour, Andrew, Hsu, En-Chi, Gowrishankar, Gayatri, Kanada, Masamitsu, Jokerst, Jesse V., Sierra, Raymond G., Chang, Edwin, Lau, Kenneth, Sridhar, Kaushik, Bermudez, Abel, Pitteri, Sharon J., Stoyanova, Tanya, Sinclair, Robert, Nair, Viswam S., Gambhir, Sanjiv S., Demirci, Utkan·2017·ACS Nano
DOI 10.1021/acsnano.7b04878
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Circulating tumor-derived extracellular vesicles (EVs) have emerged as a promising source for identifying cancer biomarkers for early cancer detection. However, the clinical utility of EVs has thus far been limited by the fact that most EV isolation methods are tedious, nonstandardized, and require bulky instrumentation such as ultracentrifugation (UC). Here, we report a size-based EV isolation tool called ExoTIC (exosome total isolation chip), which is simple, easy-to-use, modular, and facilitates high-yield and high-purity EV isolation from biofluids. ExoTIC achieves an EV yield ∼4-1000-fold higher than that with UC, and EV-derived protein and microRNA levels are well-correlated between the two methods. Moreover, we demonstrate that ExoTIC is a modular platform that can sort a heterogeneous population of cancer cell line EVs based on size. Further, we utilize ExoTIC to isolate EVs from cancer patient clinical samples, including plasma, urine, and lavage, demonstrating the device's broad applicability to cancers and other diseases. Finally, the ability of ExoTIC to efficiently isolate EVs from small sample volumes opens up avenues for preclinical studies in small animal tumor models and for point-of-care EV-based clinical testing from fingerprick quantities (10-100 μL) of blood.

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 · 10.1021/acsnano.7b04878

Cites

52 of 52 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

Cited by

See all 396

Metadata

Authors
Liu, F., Vermesh, O., Mani, V., Ge, T. J., Madsen, S. J., Sabour, A., Hsu, E.-C., Gowrishankar, G., Kanada, M., Jokerst, J. V., Sierra, R. G., Chang, E., Lau, K., Sridhar, K., Bermudez, A., Pitteri, S. J., Stoyanova, T., Sinclair, R., Nair, V. S., Gambhir, S. S., & Demirci, U.
Venue
ACS Nano
Publisher
American Chemical Society (ACS)
Published
2017-11-01
Volume
11
Issue
11
Pages
10712-10723
ISSN
  • 1936-0851 (ISSN-L)
  • 1936-086X
DOI
10.1021/acsnano.7b04878
OpenAlex
W2765997581
Cited by
396
References
52
FWCI
8.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

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.