Comparative analysis reveals that SkM-EVs predict muscle-related signaling, while MSC-EVs favor immune pathways, suggesting distinct therapeutic uses.
Skeletal muscle-derived extracellular vesicles (SkM-EVs) are promising candidates for non-invasive, systemically delivered therapies, but their functional specificity relative to clinically advanced mesenchymal stem cell-derived EVs (MSC-EVs) remains unclear. We reanalyzed public miRNA-seq datasets of SkM-EVs and MSC-EVs and integrated validated miRNA–mRNA interactions to infer pathway-level repression potential of EV miRNA cargo. Two complementary approaches were used: a differential-expression-based relative evaluation with RBiomirGS, and an abundance-weighted absolute evaluation that converts miRNA profiles into gene-level Impact Scores followed by preranked KEGG enrichment. Despite their different formulations, both approaches converged on a shared pattern. SkM-EV miRNAs showed a predicted repression bias in FoxO, TGF-β and ErbB signaling pathways linked to muscle atrophy, metabolic homeostasis and pro-proliferative signaling. By contrast, MSC-EV miRNAs showed a predicted repression bias in immune signaling pathways. These source-dependent pathway signatures provide hypothesis-generating evidence that SkM-EVs may be better suited for muscle-, metabolic-, and cancer-related indications, whereas MSC-EVs may be more appropriate for immunomodulatory indications, pending experimental validation. Our miRNA–target-based framework provides a general strategy to benchmark EV sources at the pathway level directly from miRNA profiles.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kawamoto et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: