Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceSystematic ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

Exosome-Based Therapies for Alopecia Areata: A Systematic Review of Clinical and Experimental Evidence

Bulgaru-Iliescu AI., Moraru DC., Amarandei AH., Avadanei-Luca S., Constantinescu MC., Rusu AC.

Systematic Review on Scar, Hair Loss, Hair Regeneration, Chronic Inflammation, published in Int J Mol Sci (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceEvidence level of this study

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Systematic Review
Journal
Int J Mol Sci (2025)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
41515899
PMCID
PMC12785886
DOI
10.3390/ijms27010021

Abstract (original English)

Alopecia areata (AA) is an autoimmune-mediated nonscarring alopecia with limited therapeutic options and frequent relapses. Exosomes, nanosized extracellular vesicles secreted by various cell types, have recently emerged as potential regenerative and immunomodulatory therapies. The aim of the study is to review the clinical and preclinical evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of EV-based therapies for alopecia areata. a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library was performed from 2020 to 2 October 2025. Inclusion criteria were original studies (clinical, preclinical, in vivo, in vitro) investigating exosome-derived interventions for AA. Outcomes of interest were hair regrowth, immune modulation, follicular regeneration, and safety. A total of 499 records were retrieved from electronic database searches. After deduplication and application of the inclusion/exclusion criteria, 40 studies met the eligibility criteria for the review. Of these, two were clinical studies (one retrospective cohort, one case report), while the remainder comprised five animal (in vivo) studies, six in vitro studies, and sixteen mixed translational studies (in vitro/in vivo ± clinical). Experimental studies reported hair coverage improvements of 50-99% and, in one instance, 30% regrowth in totalis and 16% in partialis, with nearly complete regrowth in incipient alope

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

How we grade evidence
Hair FollicleHairAnimalsHumansAlopecia AreataExosomes

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research