Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 258

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 87 of the 87 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evaluation of serum extracellular vesicle isolation methods for profiling miRNAs by next‐generation sequencing

Open access
Buschmann, Dominik, Kirchner, Benedikt, Hermann, Stefanie, Märte, Melanie, Wurmser, Christine, Brandes, Florian, Kotschote, Stefan, Bonin, Michael, Steinlein, Ortrud K., Pfaffl, Michael W., Schelling, Gustav, Reithmair, Marlene·2018·Journal of Extracellular Vesicles

Abstract

Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are intercellular communicators with key functions in physiological and pathological processes and have recently garnered interest because of their diagnostic and therapeutic potential. The past decade has brought about the development and commercialization of a wide array of methods to isolate EVs from serum. Which subpopulations of EVs are captured strongly depends on the isolation method, which in turn determines how suitable resulting samples are for various downstream applications. To help clinicians and scientists choose the most appropriate approach for their experiments, isolation methods need to be comparatively characterized. Few attempts have been made to comprehensively analyse vesicular microRNAs (miRNAs) in patient biofluids for biomarker studies. To address this discrepancy, we set out to benchmark the performance of several isolation principles for serum EVs in healthy individuals and critically ill patients. Here, we compared five different methods of EV isolation in combination with two RNA extraction methods regarding their suitability for biomarker discovery‐focused miRNA sequencing as well as biological characteristics of captured vesicles. Our findings reveal striking method‐specific differences in both the properties of isolated vesicles and the ability of associated miRNAs to serve in biomarker research. While isolation by precipitation and membrane affinity was highly suitable for miRNA‐based biomarker discovery, methods based on size‐exclusion chromatography failed to separate patients from healthy volunteers. Isolated vesicles differed in size, quantity, purity and composition, indicating that each method captured distinctive populations of EVs as well as additional contaminants. Even though the focus of this work was on transcriptomic profiling of EV‐miRNAs, our insights also apply to additional areas of research. We provide guidance for navigating the multitude of EV isolation methods available today and help researchers and clinicians make an informed choice about which strategy to use for experiments involving critically ill patients.

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 · 10.1080/20013078.2018.1481321

Cites

87 of 87 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 87 references

Cited by

See all 258

Metadata

Authors
Buschmann, D., Kirchner, B., Hermann, S., Märte, M., Wurmser, C., Brandes, F., Kotschote, S., Bonin, M., Steinlein, O. K., Pfaffl, M. W., Schelling, G., & Reithmair, M.
Venue
Journal of Extracellular Vesicles
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-06-04
Volume
7
Issue
1
Pages
1481321-1481321
ISSN
2001-3078 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2805547508
Cited by
258
References
87
FWCI
8.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Evaluation of serum extracellular vesicle isolation methods for profiling miRNAs by next‐generation sequencing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/20013078.2018.1481321
The paper
Buschmann, D., Kirchner, B., Hermann, S., Märte, M., Wurmser, C., Brandes, F., Kotschote, S., Bonin, M., Steinlein, O. K., Pfaffl, M. W., Schelling, G., & Reithmair, M. (2018). Evaluation of serum extracellular vesicle isolation methods for profiling miRNAs by next‐generation sequencing. Journal of Extracellular Vesicles. https://doi.org/10.1080/20013078.2018.1481321

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.