ReviewBiology2021
Diagnostic Impact of Radiological Findings and Extracellular Vesicles: Are We Close to Radiovesicolomics?
Review in Biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The New Spine of Access to the Brain's Secrets: Extracellular Vesicles from Cerebrospinal Fluid Liquid Biopsies in CNS Diseases and Blood-Brain Barrier Research.Molecular neurobiology · 2026Review
- Diagnostic and prognostic roles of endothelial- and platelet-derived extracellular vesicles in cardiovascular diseases.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Review
- Vorinostat impairs the cancer-driving potential of leukemia-secreted extracellular vesicles.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Shining the light on mesenchymal stem cell-derived exosomes in breast cancer.Stem cell research & therapy · 2023Review
- CAR-T-Derived Extracellular Vesicles: A Promising Development of CAR-T Anti-Tumor Therapy.Cancers · 2023Review
- Circulating Extracellular Vesicles: Their Role in Patients with Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm (AAA) Undergoing EndoVascular Aortic Repair (EVAR).International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Currently, several pathologies have corresponding and specific diagnostic and therapeutic branches of interest focused on early and correct detection, as well as the best therapeutic approach. Radiology never ceases to develop newer technologies in order to give patients a clear, safe, early, and precise diagnosis; furthermore, in the last few years diagnostic imaging panoramas have been extended to the field of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning. On the other hand, clinical and laboratory tests, like flow cytometry and the techniques found in the "omics" sciences, aim to detect microscopic elements, like extracellular vesicles, with the highest specificity and sensibility for disease detection. If these scientific branches started to cooperate, playing a conjugated role in pathology diagnosis, what could be the results? Our review seeks to give a quick overview of recent state of the art research which investigates correlations between extracellular vesicles and the known radiological features useful for diagnosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.