Jump to content

Talk:Exosome (vesicle)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2019 and 5 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kalamedits.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:02, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Structure and content

[edit]

In recent edits, I tried to make the structure of "Background" more logical. It seems that this article could benefit from more review article citations and fewer references to new and unverified primary literature. For example, although I didn't remove it, the part on microRNAs is based on exciting but also very new and preliminary findings. We really don't know for sure that miRNAs shuttle from cell to cell in concentrations that can have any biologically meaningful impact. It's a very cool idea, but there's not much if any verification by independent labs in the same system, just scattered studies in a variety of systems. Wikipedia should devote more space to well known mechanisms involving exosomes and less to the latest primary literature on microRNAs. SpectraValor (talk) 21:05, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - This PMID 22722893 review source (already used) has a lot more good content we could use (and full text is free) - Rod57 (talk) 20:17, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I concur. Need to condense and replace primaries with secondaries. H2OBear (talk) 22:19, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Review

[edit]

JTH doi:10.1111/jth.13190 JFW | T@lk 15:44, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply] 

[[doi:10.1111/jth.13190 Recent developments in the nomenclature, presence, isolation, detection and clinical impact of extracellular vesicles.
   E. van der Pol1,2,*, A. N. Böing1, E. L. Gool1,2 andR. Nieuwland1]]
   Looks like a very useful update to their 2012 review already partly used in the article. Much work for someone to summarise. - Rod57 (talk) 20:22, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Updates

[edit]

This article is in need of updates for field-specific terminology and accuracy. I will edit over the next few days and would love some assistance! SlightlySourAle (talk) 03:25, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. See the new parent article for this topic, Extracellular vesicle. Can try to help out here, too. H2OBear (talk) 22:20, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not all exosomes have the same surface

[edit]

Cancer cells send out 'drones' to battle immune system from afar says " the team found that exosomes from human melanoma cells also carried PD-L1 on their surface. " and gives journal ref - potentially of clinical significance. - Rod57 (talk) 14:15, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kalamedits (talk) 18:54, 22 October 2019 (UTC)There is no in-depth information on exosome biogenesis, release, and uptake. I want to write a brief summary of mechanisms known till date[reply]

PBIO 5180_exosome biogenesis, secretion, and release

[edit]

-The page is a C-class page, and it requires lot of corrections and needs some content to make it more informative.

- The good points are, the structure is clear including the detailed subsections, well-referenced, and balanced well in terms of equal weightage given to all sections.

- There are many errors. The page says the multivesicular body is an endosome (MVB), but they are specialized subset endosomes that contain intra-luminal vesicles. There is a hyperlink to MVB, but when it opens in the endosome Wikipedia page, whereas there is no sperate page for MVB.

-The size range is vague as the upper limit is mentioned as several hundred nm. But the upper limit is around 150nm. It the size of the vesicle is say 500nm, then it classifies as microsome or ectosome. There should be brief information about other vesicles like ectosomes and apoptotic bodies.

- A whole section on the mechanism of exosome biogenesis, secretion, and uptake is important. As during the biogenesis of exosomes, selective packaging of the cargoes of miRNA and proteins are processed which make exosomes important as compared to other extracellular vesicles. Ev the uptake by recipient cell is specific making exosomes a great potential for therapeutics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kalamedits (talk • contribs) 11:47, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage.) Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26500074/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26817494/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25867197/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26454169/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26486142/#:~:text=Exosomes%20can%20be%20considered%20a,natural%20carriers%20for%20siRNA%20delivery. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1549963415001896?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0168365915300420?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1549963415002026?via%3Dihub. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 00:54, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to remove "Exosomes in aesthetic treatments" section

[edit]

This section is entirely unsourced, and it seems to be at odds with the last section of the article titled "Unapproved marketing" which is sourced. It also reads like it was lifted directly from ad copy from a company that sells such unapproved treatments (going as far as to define what an exosome is despite this clearly being unnecessary, given that the entire rest of the article is about them). I'm going to go ahead and add the "disputed section" template; if the claims can be sourced then please add relevant citations, and if not then perhaps it would be best to delete the whole section. Lumberjane Lilly (talk) 18:43, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Googled the subject of exosomes in aesthetic treatments, came to Wikipedia for facts, read that section and thought _exactly_ the same thing. My guess is that someone who sells such treatments put that there.
Delete. Guff se (talk) 21:53, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I checked the page history and found this. When this section was added by an anonymous editor, it was complete with a link to a site that sells such treatments.
im going to go ahead and delete it.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Exosome_(vesicle)&diff=prev&oldid=1241670850 Guff se (talk) 21:56, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Exosome_(vesicle)&oldid=1254828142"