Exosomes are small, spherical vesicles, 30-120 nanometers in diameter, released by all living cell types.

Exosomes play a vital role in intercellular communication and tissue coordination throughout the body. Recently, exosomes have attracted considerable interest as potential biomarkers and therapeutic tools, owing to their ability to enable early disease detection, monitor treatment responses, and predict clinical outcomes. Effective study of exosomes requires their isolation from other cellular components such as microvesicles, apoptotic bodies, and various biomolecules. The isolation process must yield exosomes in sufficient quantity and purity while maintaining their biological activity and structural integrity, ensuring reliable downstream analyses and functional studies.

The success of exosome research depends largely on the quality of the isolation method. Selecting an appropriate technique is essential, and should prioritize standardization, simplicity, speed, and high throughput, while maximizing purity and recovery at a reasonable cost. Optimized protocols are key to unlocking the full potential of exosomes in both basic and clinical research ^1,2.

Overview of exosome isolation methods

Exosome isolation methods encompass ultracentrifugation-based methods, size-based approaches, immunoaffinity strategies, and emerging microfluidic technologies. These methods are applied to various sources, including biofluids like plasma, serum, urine, cerebrospinal fluid, saliva, and cell culture supernatants, each offering specific advantages for achieving high-purity and efficient exosome extraction.

Ultracentrifugation-based techniques

Ultracentrifugation is the most widely used method for isolating exosomes, often considered the gold standard, and is employed in about 60% of exosome processing. It works by using a series of centrifugation steps to separate exosomes from other components like cells and microvesicles, with the final step involving high-speed ultracentrifugation at 100,000 x g. The method includes two types: differential ultracentrifugation and density gradient ultracentrifugation².

Differential ultracentrifugation

Differential ultracentrifugation is a widely used method for exosome isolation and typically takes around 12 hours to complete. The technique involves multiple rounds of centrifugation at increasing speeds to separate exosomes from cells, debris, proteins, and other extracellular vesicles (EVs) based on their size and density. Initial centrifugation steps at 500, 3000, and 16,000 x g are used to remove cells, large particles, and apoptotic bodies. Exosomes are then pelleted by ultracentrifugation at 100,000-150,000 x g for 1-6 hours.

Following isolation, the exosome pellet is usually washed and resuspended in a buffer such as sterile-filtered phosphate-buffered saline for downstream analysis or long-term storage at -80 °C. Studies have shown that this method typically recovers vesicles in the 50-150 nm range, though some smaller and larger vesicles may also be present².

Density gradient ultracentrifugation

Density-gradient ultracentrifugation, also known as isopycnic ultracentrifugation, isolates exosomes based on their buoyant density. Unlike differential ultracentrifugation, which depends on multiple high-speed spins, this method uses pre-formed density gradients, typically composed of sucrose, iodixanol, or iohexol. This allows particles to migrate and settle at points where their density matches the surrounding medium.

Density-gradient ultracentrifugation can be applied to a variety of biological samples, including blood, saliva, urine, breast milk, and cell culture media. For example, saliva, which contains a complex mixture of cell debris, fluids, and microorganisms, can be processed by loading the sample from either the top or bottom of the gradient, followed by ultracentrifugation. After centrifugation, fractions are carefully collected to preserve the gradient, and exosome-rich fractions are washed and centrifuged again to minimize protein contamination.

In a common approach, a stepwise gradient is prepared with solutions of decreasing density layered from bottom to top. After centrifugation, fractions are analyzed by measuring their refractive index to confirm density, and the isolated exosome pellet is resuspended in buffer for further analysis².

Challenges in ultracentrifugation

Ultracentrifugation is widely valued for its ability to yield highly enriched extracellular vesicle fractions. However, several challenges can affect the efficiency and quality of exosome isolation. Key issues associated with this method include:

• Low throughput: It is time-consuming, taking several hours to complete, limiting the number of samples that can be processed simultaneously. This low throughput can be a significant drawback in high-demand research environments, where rapid processing and quick results are important for advancing studies.
• Sample loss and contamination: During the multiple rounds of centrifugation, there is a risk of losing exosomes due to sedimentation along with larger particles or non-exosomal contaminants, such as lipoproteins and protein aggregates. This can result in lower yields and purity of the isolated exosome fraction, potentially affecting the accuracy and reliability of subsequent analyses and applications.
• Potential damage to exosomes: High centrifugal forces used during ultracentrifugation can physically disrupt exosomes, altering their morphology and functionality. Damaged exosomes may lose their biological activity, which is important for applications in diagnostics and therapeutics.
• Variability in protocols: Different laboratories may employ varying centrifugation protocols (eg, rotor types, speeds, durations) without standardization. This variability can lead to inconsistent results and difficulties in comparing data across studies, complicating reproducibility in exosome research².

Size-based isolation methods

Size-based methods isolate exosomes based on size, offering high purity but requiring careful optimization.

Size exclusion chromatography (SEC)

SEC, also known as gel filtration, is a gentle and widely used technique for isolating exosomes based on size. It preserves vesicle integrity and biological function while providing a high yield. In SEC, samples pass through a porous stationary phase where smaller molecules enter the pores and elute later, while larger particles like exosomes are excluded and elute earlier. Factors such as column dimensions, resin type, and flow rate influence resolution. Pretreatment steps like ultracentrifugation are often required to reduce impurities.

SEC is quick, cost-effective, reproducible, and compatible with various sample types, including high-viscosity fluids like plasma. It also works well with small sample volumes and avoids the structural damage often seen with harsher methods. However, it cannot effectively separate particles of similar size, such as lipoproteins and protein aggregates, which can reduce purity, and the required specialized columns and equipment may increase costs.²

Ultrafiltration (UF)

UF, also known as membrane filtration, is used for concentrating exosomes from large volumes of biological fluids like cell culture media. It works by passing the fluid through membranes with specific pore sizes or molecular weight cutoffs (typically 10-100 kDa), allowing smaller molecules to pass through while retaining larger particles like exosomes. Initial steps involve filtering out larger contaminants such as cells and debris using membranes with 0.1-0.45 µm pores. Further filtration steps remove proteins and other small impurities using specialized membranes.

UF is faster and simpler than ultracentrifugation and does not require highly specialized equipment. However, pressure-based filtration can cause shear stress that may damage exosomes, lead to membrane clogging, and result in sample loss due to particles sticking to the filter. Variations of UF include sequential, centrifugal, tandem, and tangential flow filtration (TFF). TFF is a gentler technique that improves yield and consistency by passing fluid across the membrane surface rather than directly through it, though it takes longer to complete. Despite some limitations like lower purity and possible exosome loss, UF is efficient for handling large sample volumes and is widely used as a pre-concentration step before further purification².

Immunoaffinity-based isolation

Immunoaffinity-based isolation is a method that uses antibodies or ligands to selectively capture and isolate exosomes or other target molecules based on specific surface markers.

Magnetic bead-based separation

• Magnetic bead-based separation is an advanced method for isolating exosomes, leveraging the use of functionalized beads that specifically bind to exosomal surface markers, such as tetraspanins (eg, CD63, CD81, and CD9).
• The technique offers several advantages over traditional methods, including high specificity, increased purity, and the ability to process samples quickly with minimal contamination.
• The method works by incubating biofluids with magnetic beads conjugated to antibodies targeting exosome-specific proteins, followed by the magnetic separation of exosome-bound beads.
• While magnetic bead-based capture improves exosome isolation efficiency, challenges remain, such as optimizing bead selection and ensuring consistency across different biological samples, making standardization a key area for future research³.

Polymer precipitation

• Polymer precipitation, originally used for isolating viruses and other macromolecules, has gained popularity for exosome isolation in recent years.
• The method involves the use of reagents such as protamine, acetate, protein organic solvent precipitation (PROSPR), and polyethylene glycol (PEG), with PEG being the most employed.
• PEG reduces the solubility of exosomes, causing them to precipitate, after which they can be collected via low-speed centrifugation.
• The approach is simple, does not require complex equipment or lengthy procedures, and can be easily scaled to process large sample volumes, making it compatible with other separation techniques⁴.

At Abcam, we offer a variety of high-quality biological reagents and tools for exosome research. Our exosome panel (Calnexin, CD9, CD63, CD81, Hsp70, TSG101) (ab275018)), which is part of our multiplex kits range, is designed for the identification and characterization of exosomes.

Emerging isolation technologies

Microfluidics has become a powerful tool in biological and medical research due to its ability to precisely control and manipulate small fluid volumes. This precision enables the creation of microenvironments that closely replicate physiological conditions, making microfluidic devices highly suitable for studying disease mechanisms and evaluating therapeutic interventions. Beyond these applications, microfluidic platforms are increasingly employed for exosome isolation based on particle size and specific surface markers.

Microfluidic-based exosome isolation offers numerous advantages, including high-throughput processing, minimal sample loss, and high purity of the recovered vesicles. These features are particularly valuable for biomedical research, drug discovery, and clinical applications such as diagnostics and therapeutics. Various microfluidic approaches have been developed, each with distinct mechanisms, benefits, and limitations:

• Microfluidic filtration: Separates particles based on size without the need for labels or external fields. It is scalable but prone to clogging.
• Viscoelastic flow separation: A size-based, label-free method requiring specialized media; device fabrication is simple, but purity and yield can be low.
• Inertial focusing: Achieves label-free, size-based separation with straightforward device construction but tends to negatively select against smaller exosomes, reducing efficiency.
• Deterministic lateral displacement (DLD): Separates particles by size without external fields and is label-free; however, it can suffer from clogging and co-isolation of similar-sized vesicles.
• Affinity-based capture: Utilizes antibodies or aptamers to target specific exosomal surface markers, offering high specificity and purity but often limited by low recovery rates, especially with large sample volumes.
• Dielectrophoresis (DEP)-based separation: Employs non-uniform electric fields to isolate particles based on dielectric properties, providing label-free, controllable separation, though exosome damage from Joule heating is a concern.
• Acoustic-based separation: Uses differences in size and mechanical properties for biocompatible, label-free, and controllable separation, but typically requires expensive auxiliary equipment⁵.

Isolation of exosomes from biofluids and cell culture media

Exosomes are isolated from biofluids and cell culture media using various techniques, ensuring purity for accurate analysis.

Biofluids

Isolating exosomes from biological fluids remains difficult due to contaminants such as proteins and lipoproteins that share similar size and density. The chosen isolation method greatly influences exosome yield, purity, morphology, and molecular profile. Differential ultracentrifugation is commonly used but often co-isolates non-exosomal particles and requires lengthy processing.

Density gradient ultracentrifugation (eg, using iodixanol) enhances purity by separating particles based on density rather than size. Ultrafiltration (UF) offers a faster, simpler alternative but risks filter clogging and sample loss from vesicle adhesion. SEC better preserves exosome integrity and removes smaller contaminants, though it typically yields lower quantities and struggles to separate similarly sized particles.

The optimal method depends on the sample type, desired purity, and intended downstream applications. For example, blood and urine present unique challenges; albumin and lipoproteins in blood, and uromodulin in urine, can interfere with isolation. Combining techniques, such as ultracentrifugation with filtration or chromatography, is often necessary to improve outcomes. No universal protocol currently exists, and ongoing research continues to focus on developing more efficient, standardized methods for exosome isolation⁶.

Cell culture supernatants

Cell culture supernatants are commonly used as a rich and controllable source for exosome isolation, making them suitable for comparative evaluations of different isolation approaches. Multiple methods are available for isolating exosomes from culture supernatants, each based on different principles such as ultracentrifugation, polymer-based precipitation, SEC, and affinity capture. These methods vary in terms of yield, purity, particle size distribution, zeta potential, and compatibility with downstream analyses such as RNA quantification, protein profiling, and functional assays.

Precipitation-based methods generally offer high yields but may co-isolate non-exosomal contaminants such as microvesicles and protein aggregates, affecting purity and bioactivity. In contrast, SEC and affinity-based techniques often yield more uniform vesicle populations with better dispersion stability and cleaner protein profiles, though sometimes at the cost of lower total yield. Zeta potential measurements can provide insights into vesicle stability, with more negative values indicating better dispersion and less aggregation.

Size distribution and polydispersity index are also critical, as broader or heterogeneous distributions may signal the presence of unwanted vesicle types or impurities. RNA extracted from exosomes isolated using different methods typically shows comparable quality for transcript analysis, although quantity may reflect overall exosome yield. However, proteomic applications may be more sensitive to method-specific contaminants, which can interfere with mass spectrometry.

Ultimately, the choice of isolation method should be guided by the intended downstream application. High-purity methods are preferred for proteomics and functional studies, while high-yield approaches may be more suitable for transcriptomics or exploratory research. Standardization and optimization of protocols are essential to ensure reproducibility and accuracy in exosome-based studies⁷.

Exosome detection techniques

Exosome detection techniques encompass physical methods for size and morphology, biochemical assays for marker analysis, and advanced technologies for highly sensitive, specific cancer diagnostics.

Physical characterization

Physical characterization techniques are used to measure exosome size, concentration, and morphology, ensuring precise and accurate physical characterization.

Nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA)

• NTA accurately measures the size (30-1000 nm) and concentration of individual EVs by tracking their Brownian motion using the Stokes–Einstein equation and dynamic light scattering (DLS).
• Compared to transmission electron microscopy and flow cytometry, NTA offers superior single-particle resolution and sensitivity for analyzing the morphology and heterogeneity of EVs.
• Fluorescent NTA enables the phenotyping of EV subpopulations using specific antibodies or fluorescent markers, allowing for detailed characterization of vesicle subsets².

Dynamic light scattering (DLS)

DLS is a promising technique for analyzing exosomes. By using lasers, DLS measures the fluctuations in scattered light intensity caused by the Brownian motion of particles, allowing for the calculation of particle size through the Stokes–Einstein equation. DLS is noninvasive, highly sensitive, and requires minimal sample volume, making it suitable for analyzing large numbers of vesicles at once. Unlike electron microscopy, DLS does not require any sample pre-treatment, such as dyeing or fixation, which simplifies the process and provides insights into the size and homogeneity of the sample. As a result, DLS is an effective tool for researchers to assess both the quality and consistency of exosome extracts⁸.

Transmission electron microscopy (TEM)

TEM offers ~1 nm resolution, enabling detailed visualization of exosome morphology, structure, and size at the single-vesicle level. Through negative staining, TEM is widely used to confirm exosome presence, assess quality, and detect structural heterogeneity or impurities. Sample prep involves fixation, staining (eg, uranyl acetate), and dehydration, which can alter vesicle shape (eg, cup-shaped distortion due to lack of cytoskeleton) ².

Biochemical characterization

Biochemical characterization of exosomes uses western blotting for marker detection, flow cytometry for quantification, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for sensitive protein analysis.

Western blotting

• Western blotting is important for confirming exosome presence and purity by detecting protein markers such as tetraspanins (CD9, CD63, CD81) and biogenesis proteins (TSG101, Alix).
• After isolating exosomes via differential ultracentrifugation, proteins are lysed, quantified, and separated using SDS-PAGE, then transferred to a PVDF or nitrocellulose membrane.
• Antibody incubation and chemiluminescent detection validate isolation and purity while also differentiating exosome subpopulations based on marker expression, offering insights into their molecular heterogeneity and functional diversity⁹.

Flow cytometry

Flow cytometry, particularly the bead-based approach, allows semi-quantitative detection of exosome subgroups by targeting membrane biomarkers with antibody labeling. This technique binds exosomes to aldehyde/sulfate-latex beads, followed by staining and detection using a laser beam to analyze light scattering.

Compared to NTA, western blotting, and electron microscopy, flow cytometry offers high-throughput, repeatable analysis and multiparametric profiling of particle size, shape, and surface markers. However, conventional systems struggle with background noise and resolution limits, especially for small vesicles like exosomes. To address these issues, advanced platforms such as high-sensitivity flow cytometers, imaging flow cytometry (IFCM), and photoacoustic flow cytometry (PAFCM) have been introduced, enabling more precise detection, phenotyping, and even in vivo tracking of tumor-derived exosomes².

Related sample preparation and detection kits include:

• Exosome isolation and analysis kit - flow cytometry, cell culture (CD63 / CD9) for flow cytometry that employs a bead-bound anti-CD63 capture antibody and a fluorochrome-conjugated anti-CD9 detection antibody to efficiently isolate and detect CD63-positive human exosomes,
• Exosome isolation and analysis kit - flow cytometry, plasma (CD9 / CD81) that utilizes a bead-bound anti-CD9 capture antibody and a fluorochrome-conjugated anti-CD81 detection antibody to effectively isolate and identify CD9-positive human exosomes, and
• Exosome isolation and analysis kit - flow cytometry, urine (CD63 / CD9) that utilizes a bead-bound anti-CD63 capture antibody and a fluorochrome-conjugated anti-CD9 detection antibody to effectively isolate and identify CD63-positive human exosomes.

ELISA

ELISA offers a highly sensitive method for quantifying exosome markers such as GRP78 by using antibody–antigen interactions to measure protein concentrations within exosomal fractions. An advanced variation of this technique, the ultrasensitive ELISA enhanced with thio-NAD cycling, enables the detection of GRP78 at subattomolar levels, allowing for precise quantification in both lumen and membrane fractions. This method incorporates a simplified protocol for separating these fractions, which removes the need for ultracentrifugation and helps reduce protein loss. By facilitating detailed analysis of protein distributions and their roles in intercellular communication, this refined ELISA approach provides deeper insights into exosome biology and cancer progression¹⁰.

Advanced detection techniques

Advanced detection techniques enable highly sensitive, specific exosome detection, enhancing cancer diagnostics and personalized treatments.

Surface plasmon resonance (SPR)

SPR biosensors enable sensitive and specific detection of exosomes through the use of molecular aptamer beacons that bind to target markers such as HER2. This binding induces structural changes that expose catalytic G-quadruplex DNA (G4 DNA), which, in-turn, catalyzes the deposition of gold nanoparticles on the exosome membrane. This process amplifies the SPR signal without relying on natural enzymes. The method’s dual recognition of exosome surface proteins and lipid membranes ensures high specificity, allowing for accurate quantification of HER2-positive exosomes. This capability distinguishes cancer patients from healthy individuals and holds significant promise for clinical applications in cancer diagnostics and treatment monitoring¹¹.

Raman spectroscopy

Raman spectroscopy, particularly surface-enhanced Raman scattering (SERS), enables sensitive detection of exosomes by amplifying molecular signatures through the use of plasmonic nanostructures such as gold or silver nanoparticles. Functionalizing SERS substrates with antibodies or aptamers allows for the selective capture of exosomes, enabling accurate profiling of their protein and nucleic acid content. Advanced techniques, including hierarchical nanostructures and signal amplification strategies, further enhance detection limits and support multiplexed analysis for precise quantification in complex biological samples. This Raman-based approach facilitates non-invasive cancer diagnosis and monitoring, contributing to early disease detection and the development of personalized treatment strategies¹².

Clinical applications of exosome isolation and detection

Exosome isolation and detection enable non-invasive cancer diagnosis, monitor neurodegenerative biomarkers, and assess cardiovascular disease progression.

Cancer diagnostics

• Exosome-based diagnostics use liquid biopsy for non-invasive cancer detection and monitoring.
• Exosomes in bodily fluids (eg, blood, urine) carry tumor-specific biomarkers like proteins, miRNAs, and lipids, which reflect genetic and phenotypic changes in cancer cells.
• Advanced detection techniques (eg, SERS) allow for high-sensitivity, high-specificity detection and quantification of biomarkers.
• Benefits include early cancer diagnosis, prognosis, and personalized treatment strategies.
• The approach overcomes limitations of traditional tissue biopsies (sampling bias, invasiveness) and enables real-time tumor monitoring and therapeutic response assessment, improving patient management¹².

Neurodegenerative diseases

• Exosome-based diagnostics offer a minimally invasive method for detecting neurodegenerative diseases, including Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s.
• In Alzheimer’s disease, exosomes from blood or cerebrospinal fluid show increased amyloid-beta and phosphorylated tau proteins, indicating disease progression.
• In Parkinson’s disease, α-synuclein in neuronal-derived exosomes serves as a key biomarker, helping differentiate Parkinson’s from other neurodegenerative disorders and identify specific disease subtypes.
• Exosomes can cross the blood-brain barrier and protect their molecular cargo, enhancing early diagnosis, disease monitoring, and personalized treatment approaches¹³.

Cardiovascular disease

Exosomes are emerging as promising biomarkers for diagnosing various heart diseases. Studies have identified specific microRNAs (miRNAs), long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs), and circular RNAs (circRNAs) encapsulated within exosomes isolated from plasma or serum, significantly associated with conditions such as diabetic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, atrial fibrillation, atherosclerosis, coronary artery disease (CAD), acute myocardial infarction, and postoperative atrial fibrillation. These exosomes were primarily isolated using ultracentrifugation or commercial kits and characterized by transmission electron microscopy (TEM), nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA), and western blotting. Distinct RNA expression patterns under disease conditions were confirmed through quantitative real-time PCR and next-generation sequencing.

Beyond diagnostics, exosomes are also being investigated for therapeutic applications in heart disease. Recent approaches include enhancing cardiac repair using targeted delivery systems such as cardiac homing peptides and improving cargo loading through techniques like electroporation and click chemistry. Intrapericardial injection of hydrogel-based carriers loaded with stem cell-derived exosomes has demonstrated effective heart failure treatment without invasive surgery, offering improved retention, reduced immune response, and enhanced regenerative outcomes¹⁴.

Challenges in exosome isolation and detection

Exosome isolation and detection face significant challenges due to the lack of standardized, efficient, and scalable methodologies, resulting in considerable variability in purity and yield across different studies. Traditional isolation techniques, such as ultracentrifugation, SEC, and immunoaffinity capture, each come with inherent limitations, including labor intensiveness, low throughput, and potential contamination with non-exosomal proteins and other EVs.

The inherent heterogeneity of exosomes, which vary in size, composition, and cellular origin, further complicates the development of universal detection and characterization protocols. Additionally, the nanoscale size of exosomes (30-150 nm) and their similarity to other EVs make accurate detection challenging, necessitating the use of advanced and often costly techniques like NTA, high-resolution flow cytometry, and electron microscopy.

Moreover, the fragile nature of exosomes renders them susceptible to structural damage during isolation and handling, potentially altering their biological properties and compromising the integrity of subsequent analyses.

Finally, the absence of reproducible protocols and the variability introduced by different isolation and detection methods impede the consistency and reliability of exosome research, thereby limiting their potential applications in diagnostics and therapeutics^2,15.

Emerging trends and future perspectives

Emerging trends in exosome isolation research focus on enhancing isolation and purification techniques, such as microfluidics and affinity-based methods, to improve yield and purity for clinical applications.

Advanced engineering strategies, including surface modifications, hybridization with synthetic nanoparticles, and integration with bioactive scaffolds like nanocomposite hydrogels, are transforming exosomes into versatile nanocarriers with enhanced targeting specificity, therapeutic efficacy, and controlled release profiles for personalized regenerative medicine.

The adoption of multi-omics approaches like proteomics, genomics, and lipidomics enables comprehensive characterization of exosome cargo, facilitating the discovery of novel biomarkers and the development of targeted therapies^1,16.

FAQs

What are the latest advancements in exosome detection technologies?

Recent advancements in exosome plasmonic sensing have focused on integrating microfluidic devices with plasmonic biosensors, enabling highly efficient, real-time, and multiplexed detection of exosomes from minimal sample volumes. Additionally, the incorporation of artificial intelligence algorithms enhances the analysis of complex spectral and imaging data, improving diagnostic accuracy and facilitating intelligent, automated interpretation for clinical applications.

How does ultracentrifugation compare to other exosome isolation techniques?

Ultracentrifugation, the classical method for exosome isolation, offers high purity and functionality of isolated exosomes but is time-consuming (3-4 hours) and requires expensive, specialized ultracentrifuges, limiting its scalability compared to other techniques. In contrast, precipitation methods are cost-effective, scalable, and suitable for high-throughput industrial applications despite longer processing times and potential contamination. Ultrafiltration provides a quicker alternative with moderate scalability but suffers from lower purity and functionality due to co-isolation of non-exosomal particles.

What are the most effective methods for exosome isolation from plasma?

Size exclusion chromatography and ultracentrifugation are the most effective methods for isolating exosomes from plasma, as size exclusion chromatography provides high purity by minimizing albumin contamination, and ultracentrifugation achieves higher vesicle yields. However, while size exclusion chromatography is preferable for applications requiring highly pure exosomes, ultracentrifugation is favored when larger quantities are needed, despite its requirement for specialized equipment and longer processing times.

References

1. Gao J, Li A, Hu J, et al. Recent developments in isolating methods for exosomes. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, 10:1100892 (2023).
2. Dilsiz N. A comprehensive review on recent advances in exosome isolation and characterization: toward clinical applications. Translational Oncology, 50:102121 (2024).
3. Oksvold MP, Neurauter A, Pedersen KW. Magnetic bead-based isolation of exosomes. Methods in Molecular Biology, 1218:465–481 (2015).
4. Chen J, Li P, Zhang T, et al. Review on strategies and technologies for exosome isolation and purification. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, 9:811971 (2022).
5. Ozcelik A, Cevi̇k O. Microfluidic methods used in exosome isolation. Biocell, 47(5):959–964 (2023).
6. Yakubovich EI, Polischouk AG, Evtushenko VI. Principles and problems of exosome isolation from biological fluids. Biochemistry (Moscow) Supplement Series A: Membrane and Cell Biology, 16(2):115–126 (2022).
7. Patel GK, Khan MA, Zubair H, et al. Comparative analysis of exosome isolation methods using culture supernatant for optimum yield, purity and downstream applications. Scientific Reports, 9:5335 (2019).
8. Lyu TS, Ahn Y, Im YJ, et al. The characterization of exosomes from fibrosarcoma cells and the useful usage of dynamic light scattering (DLS) for their evaluation. PLoS ONE, 16(1):e0231994 (2021).
9. Kurian TK, Banik S, Gopal D, Chakrabarti S, Mazumder N. Elucidating methods for isolation and quantification of exosomes: a review. Molecular Biotechnology, 63(4):249–266 (2021).
10. Iha K, Tsurusawa N, Tsai HY, et al. Ultrasensitive ELISA detection of proteins in separated lumen and membrane fractions of cancer cell exosomes. Analytical Biochemistry, 654:114831 (2022).
11. Chen W, Li Z, Cheng W, et al. Surface plasmon resonance biosensor for exosome detection based on reformative tyramine signal amplification activated by molecular aptamer beacon. Journal of Nanobiotechnology, 19:450 (2021).
12. Li J, Li Y, Li P, et al. Exosome detection via surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy for cancer diagnosis. Acta Biomaterialia, 144:1–14 (2022).
13. Dehghani S, Ocakcı O, Hatipoglu PT, et al. Exosomes as biomarkers and therapeutic agents in neurodegenerative diseases: current insights and future directions. Molecular Neurobiology (2025).
14. Zhang Z, Zou Y, Song C, et al. Advances in the study of exosomes in cardiovascular diseases. Journal of Advanced Research, 66:133–153 (2024).
15. Palomar-Alonso N, Lee M, Kim M. Exosomes: membrane-associated proteins, challenges and perspectives. Biochemistry and Biophysics Reports, 37:101599 (2024).
16. Mukerjee N, Bhattacharya A, Maitra S, et al. Exosome isolation and characterization for advanced diagnostic and therapeutic applications. Materials Today Bio, 31:101613 (2025).