Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Preclinical study demonstrates cardiac progenitor extracellular vesicles selectively deliver mRNA to mouse hearts with reduced toxicity, highlighting a targeted therapeutic delivery platform.
Efficient and specific delivery of mRNA to target tissues is critical for maximising therapeutic benefits while minimising off-target effects and systemic toxicity. Systemic administration of mRNA using lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) or extracellular vesicles (EVs) typically leads to predominant accumulation in the liver. We hypothesised that cardiac-specific EVs could promote enhanced relative cardiac enrichment of delivered mRNA compared with non-cardiac EVs or LNPs. In mice, intravenous administration of cardiac progenitor cell-derived EVs (CPC-EVs) achieved the greatest relative cardiac selectivity of modified mRNA encoding vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A) to the heart, with reduced liver accumulation relative to non-cardiac EVs and LNPs. Cytokine profiling across seven organs revealed that LNP delivery triggered a widespread pro-inflammatory response, whereas CPC-EVs elicited only a localised and limited cytokine activation, suggesting a more favourable safety profile. Furthermore, direct intramyocardial injection of CPC-EVs not only led to efficient mRNA uptake by cardiac tissue and robust VEGF-A protein expression, but also minimal transcriptomic perturbation in the cardiac tissue, as confirmed by RNA-seq. In contrast, LNPs and non-cardiac EVs induced widespread perturbation in the transcriptome of cardiac tissue. Functionally, VEGF-A mRNA delivery via CPC-EVs markedly increased CD31 and α-SMA expression and vessel formation in ex vivo aortic ring assays, confirming enhanced angiogenic potential. Together, these findings support CPC-EVs as a promising platform for achieving enhanced cardiac delivery of mRNA, with reduced liver accumulation, limited off-target transcriptomic perturbation, a more selective cytokine response, and enhanced angiogenic activity in ex vivo assays.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nawaz et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: