Key result
Preclinical studies of extracellular vesicle-based therapies for myocardial infarction suffer from significant experimental limitations regarding isolation purity, dosing, and uptake assessment.
Why the study?
Extracellular vesicles hold promise for treating myocardial infarction, but experimental approaches assessing their therapeutic efficacy face methodological limitations.
Fundamental improvements in extracellular vesicle study design, including standardized isolation, dosing, and appropriate controls, are required to ensure reproducibility in preclinical myocardial infarction studies.
Caution against advancing EV-MI therapies clinically on current data; leaves open efficacy pending standardized isolation, dosing, and controls.
Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are particles secreted by a vast variety of cells and are often recognised to mimic the properties of their parent cell, as such those derived from developmental sources hold promise for the treatment of various diseases including myocardial infarction (MI). Here we review the experimental approaches taken for assessing the therapeutic efficacy of EVs for MI and find overt shortcomings regarding purity of isolated EVs, quantitation, dosing, EV labelling/uptake, route of administration and use of appropriate controls that renders much of the data uninterpretable. Overall, the EV/MI field has suffered from experimental approaches that are not fully standardised or validated. Fundamental improvements in EV study design are required to improve interpretation of efficacy and to ensure reproducibility and comparability across preclinical MI studies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kennedy et al. (2020) conducted a review in Myocardial infarction. Extracellular vesicle-based therapies was evaluated. Preclinical studies of extracellular vesicle-based therapies for myocardial infarction suffer from significant experimental limitations regarding isolation purity, dosing, and uptake assessment.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: