Skip to main content

Table 1 Summary of the different approaches in the engineering of EVs for precision cancer therapeutics

From: Stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles: role in oncogenic processes, bioengineering potential, and technical challenges

Engineering approachExamplesAdvantagesDisadvantagesReferences
Overexpression of protein in parent cellsRabies viral glycoprotein, CD63, GLUT4, HSPs, BDNF, CD24, EpCAM, CD3, SMPD2, HIF-1αEnhanced cargo loading, efficient delivery, relatively simple, biocompatible, stable expressionLow transfection efficiency, contamination of non-transfected EVs, risk of genotoxicity[51, 52, 57]
Antibody/antigen conjugationCD9 antibody with Alexa-647, mCherry, photoreceptor cryptochrome 2, Nef-E7 fusion proteinSpecific and easy to operate, targeted delivery, high therapeutic potentialMay impair functionality, low loading efficiency, antigen immunogenicity[50, 51, 55, 56]
Modification of surface proteinsArg-Gly-Asp (RGD) peptide, Ac4ManNAz, PDGFREasy, effective for delivery, fast and scalable production, extended half lifeCompromise membrane integrity, may change surface area[24, 52, 55, 58]
Synthetic modificationEMMPRIN, MHC-I and MHC-IIGreater tracking efficiency, high drug loading efficiencyToxicity, washing required, potential deformation of membrane[51, 52, 54, 58, 59]
Chemical modificationGlypican-1, c(RGDyK) peptidesEnhanced fusion efficiency, better conjugation, stable bindingToxicity, may impair functionality, harsh chemicals involved[51, 54, 56, 59]
Passive and active loading (sonication, incubation, electroporation)Paclitaxel, imatinib, siRNA, doxorubicinSimple, intact membrane, quick and efficient, simple protocol, chemical freeAggregation, slow passive loading, low efficiency, untargeted release of drugs[51, 52, 54,55,56,57]