ReviewBiology2023
Extracellular Vesicles in Lung Cancer: Bystanders or Main Characters?
Review in Biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Circulating exosomal miRNA in acute coronary syndrome: mechanisms, clinical relevance and future directions.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2026Review
- Calls to action on lung cancer management and research.The oncologist · 2024Article
- Molecular Biology of Cancer-Interplay of Malignant Cells with Emerging Therapies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Extracellular Vesicles in Lung Cancer: Implementation in Diagnosis and Therapeutic Perspectives.Cancers · 2024Review
- Extracellular vesicles in non-small cell lung cancer stemness and clinical applications.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
- Lung Cancer Cell-Derived Exosome Detection Using Electrochemical Approach towards Early Cancer Screening.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Extracellular Vesicles (EVs) as Crucial Mediators of Cell-Cell Interaction in Asthma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Lung cancer still represents the main cause of cancer death worldwide. The poor survival is mainly related to the diagnosis which is often obtained in advanced stages when the disease is unresectable and characterized by the worst prognosis. Only in the last decades have great discoveries led to the development of new therapies targeted to oncogenes and to boost the host immune response against the tumor. Tumor identification and molecular/immunological characterization rely on bioptic samples which represent the gold standard for diagnosis. Nonetheless, less invasive procedures providing small samples will be more and more common in the future. Extracellular vesicles (EV), submicron particles released by any cell type, are candidates for diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers. EV are mediators of intercellular communication and can convey cytokines, miRNAs, antigens, and many other factors of tumorigenesis. This review summarizes the most appealing findings on lung-cancer-related EV, debating the evidence on circulating versus airway EV as potential biomarkers in disease management and the main studies on the role of these particles on lung cancer pathogenesis. Overall, the available results point toward a wide range of possible applications, supported by the promising achievements of genotyping on BAL fluid EV and proteomic analysis on pleural effusion EV. Nonetheless, the study of lung EV is still affected by remarkable methodological issues, especially when in vitro evidence is translated into humans. Whether EV still represent an "information fog" or can be useful in lung cancer management will be discussed, with possible hints on how to improve their usage.
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.