ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2026
Comparison of Methods for the Isolation of Salivary Extracellular Vesicles.
Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Extracellular vesicles (EVs) have attracted growing attention for their diagnostic and prognostic potential as they carry molecular cargo such as DNA, RNA, proteins and lipids derived from their cells of origin. While EV research has traditionally focused on blood, this study explicitly explored saliva as a promising, non-invasive sample matrix for EV isolation and biomarker discovery. Six different EV isolation methods were compared for their ability to recover salivary small EVs suitable for downstream DNA and microRNA analysis. Nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA) revealed variation in vesicle sizes, concentrations and surface charges across all tested EV isolation approaches. In addition to being the fastest and simplest isolation method, the miRCURY Exosome Isolation kit-serum and plasma from Qiagen (ExiQ) also resulted in the highest EV yields with average particle sizes of ~130 nm. Western blot analysis further verified the presence of EV-specific markers (CD9, Alix) and no detectable signal for ApoA1 as an indicator for lipoprotein contamination, underscoring the purity of ExiQ-isolated vesicles. Always applying the same protocol for parallel DNA and RNA isolation on vesicles extracted by various methods, differences in DNA and RNA yields were observed across the evaluated isolation kits. ExiQ-isolated EVs showed the best recovery for both nucleic acid types. Notably, nuclease treatment of isolated EVs revealed that substantial amounts of DNA were present on the EV surface, whereas microRNA was predominantly localized within the vesicles. The present study, extensively comparing different EV isolation methods, demonstrates that salivary EVs are a viable source for non-invasive diagnostics and suggests the miRCURY Exosome Isolation kit-serum and plasma from Qiagen (ExiQ) to be a good choice for integration in future salivary EV-based diagnostic assays given its simplicity, speed and excellent performance.
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.