Extracellular vesicles in neurodegenerative diseases: A systematic review

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

Abstract (original English)

Introduction Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are known to have a significant role in the central nervous system (CNS) and neurodegenerative disease. Methods PubMed, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, EMBASE, and Google Scholar were used to identify published articles about EV modifications (2012 to Feb 2022). Results In total, 1,435 published papers were identified among the searched articles, with 1,128 non-duplicate publications being identified. Following the screening of titles and abstracts, 214 publications were excluded; following the full-text screening of 93 published articles, another 33 publications were excluded. The remaining 60 studies were considered. The kappa statistic of 0.868 indicated that the raters were highly reliable. Furthermore, the inter-reliability and intra-reliability coefficients were found to be 0.931 and 0.908, respectively, indicating strong reliability and consistency between the eligible studies identified by the raters. A total of 27 relevant studies demonstrated the role of EVs as therapeutic and diagnostic biomarkers in neurodegenerative diseases. Of note, 19 and 14 studies, respectively, found EVs to be pioneering in diagnostic and therapeutic roles. Discussion EVs play an important role in the central nervous system (CNS), aiding in cell-to-cell communication and serving as a diagnostic marker and therapeutic target in a variety of neurodegenerati

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.

Browse all related research

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