Skip to main content
ACS AuthorChoice logoLink to ACS AuthorChoice
. 2025 Jun 13;11(9):5157–5185. doi: 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.5c00119

Exploring the Vertical Transmission of Exosomes in Diagnostic and Therapeutic Targets for Pregnancy Complications

Shrikrishna Bhagat , Rakshith Hanumanthappa , Ketki Bhokare §, Neelabh Datta , Nidhi Vastrad , M David , N Maharaj , Krishnan Anand #,*
PMCID: PMC12421513  PMID: 40511890

Abstract

During pregnancy, the mother-placenta relationship involves intricate and dynamic exchanges. Over the course of gestation, the maternal body encounters numerous fetal materials secreted by the placenta, such as hormones, growth factors, and extracellular vesicles like exosomes. These exosomes are carriers of key biomolecules, including proteins, lipids, nucleic acids (DNA), and microRNA (miRNA), capable of influencing maternal cellular activity. Although the exact functions of placental exosomes during pregnancy remain under investigation, existing research indicates that they contribute significantly to normal placental growth and maternal immune tolerance, both of which are vital for sustaining a healthy pregnancy. The involvement of exosomes in the etiology and progression of pregnancy complications is also under investigation. Variations in the quality and quantity of placenta-derived exosomes, their concentration in maternal plasma, and their composition and bioactivity have been linked to complications such as gestational diabetes, preeclampsia, and maternal infections. There is considerable interest not only in understanding the role of placenta-derived exosomes in both normal and complicated pregnancies but also in their potential as biomarkers and therapeutic targets. Progress in this field depends on using specific and well-characterized methodologies and techniques to precisely determine the role of exosomes in pregnancy complications and their clinical utility. This review emphasizes the significance of placenta-derived exosomes in pregnancy, focusing on their interaction with the maternal system. Additionally, it explores new techniques and ideas for analyzing placental exosomes as potential biomarkers for the early diagnosis of pregnancy complications.

Keywords: placental EVs, exosomes, preeclampsia, gestational diabetes, immunomodulation, biomarker discovery


graphic file with name ab5c00119_0010.jpg


graphic file with name ab5c00119_0008.jpg

1. Introduction

Pregnancy is a complex biological process, marked by numerous molecular and cellular interactions that occur during each trimester to support, maintain, and facilitate the successful delivery of the baby. It is a state that alters normal physiological conditions, usually without negative repercussions to the mother. Some women experience health problems during pregnancy, even if they were healthy before, and these intricacies can harm both the mother and the fetus, turning the pregnancy into a high-risk situation. According to the United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF), one pregnant woman or a newborn dies every 11 seconds worldwide. This significant risk to the health of pregnant women and babies increases dramatically during pandemics. Maternal health complications represent a significant public health challenge, endangering fetal development and placing substantial socioeconomic strain due to the increased demand for healthcare and social support services. Recently, COVID-19 has been proven to be correlated with potential adverse outcomes for both the mother and the baby. Many lifestyle behaviors contribute to pregnancy difficulties, as most substances of abuse, alcohol, etc., easily pass the placenta and can impact fetal brain development as well as environmental factors like heat stress , and pollution, which trigger adverse pregnancy consequences. Neonatal mortality is high due to abnormal fetal development and growth illnesses such as neural tube abnormalities, congenital heart disease, and numerous deformities. Pregnancy complications include conditions that occur during pregnancy, such as gestational diabetes, gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, preterm birth, and fetal growth limitation. However, the burden is immense, with approximately 3–5% of women worldwide experiencing preeclampsia, a new-onset multisystemic hypertensive disorder of pregnancy.

Despite significant improvements in monitoring and prevention in other areas of healthcare, the etiology of complications associated with pregnancy still remains unknown. Early detection of pregnancy-related complications and abnormal fetal development is largely dependent on standard hematological assessments and ultrasound imaging techniques. One key challenge with many current therapies is their inability to precisely target the maternal or fetal compartments or the placental interface, depending on the condition, which limits their effectiveness and may lead to unwanted side effects. During gestation, the placenta secretes various molecules that modify maternal physiology to meet the fetus’s needs. It can also impact the mother’s physiological processes through extracellular vesicles (EVs). Reports suggest that exosomes play a role in paracrine communication between fetal and maternal tissues. In pregnancies with complications, this form of cellular communication contributes to the presentation of disease symptoms, as the release of exosomes is influenced by the surrounding maternal microenvironment. The precise origin, cargo, and functions of exosomes in maternal circulation during pregnancy are still under investigation, and further research is needed to fully understand their role in both normal and complicated pregnancies. The present review explores in detail the role of exosomes during gestation and their trafficking into the maternal circulation, with emphasis on immune and metabolic adaptations to regulate different pregnancy complications and their implications in clinical use.

2. Exosomes and Their Biogenesis

Exosomes, often described as molecular messengers, are nanosized vesicles that belong to a broader category of extracellular vesicles (EVs). Derived from nearly every cellular compartment, exosomes influence the function and fate of the recipient cells. These phospholipid vesicles follow a specific pathway that allows them to mediate communication between cells, thereby regulating a variety of physiological processes. The endocytosis of molecular cargo initiates this pathway and internalizes diverse biological substances including proteins, lipids, nucleic acids, and signaling molecules. Exosome formation within the endosomal system occurs as early endosomes transition into late endosomes, characterized by the loss of RAB5A, RAB4, RAB11, and RAB22 proteins and the acquisition of late endosomal markers like RAB7 and RAB9A. , The RAB family of G-proteins controls different functions, wherein the RAB GTPases play a crucial role in regulating every facet of intracellular vesicle trafficking. Exosomes form intraluminal vesicles (ILVs) in late endosomes via inward budding of endosomal multivesicular bodies (MVBs), which either degrade or fuse with the plasma membrane, releasing ILVs as exosomes. , The biogenesis of exosomes is controlled by activating cell-specific receptors and signaling pathways. Reports have indicated that syndecan heparan sulfate proteoglycans and their cytoplasmic adaptor syntenin control the formation of exosomes and play a key role in membrane transport and cell signaling. The Endosomal-Sorting Complex required for Transport (ESCRT), an intricate protein molecule consisting of ubiquitous subunits, ESCRT- 0, ESCRT- I, ESCRT- II, and ESCRT- III is responsible for sorting molecules into ILVs and facilitating exosomal cargo sorting and vesicle budding. ESCRT-0 recognizes ubiquitin-tagged proteins, forming a complex with ESCRT-I and ESCRT-II, which associates with ESCRT-III to bud vesicles. Vps4 provides energy for ESCRT-III to cleave buds and produce ILVs, indicating the existence of an ESCRT-independent ILV formation pathway. , The ESCRT-independent mode is an ancillary pathway involving lipid raft-associated tetraspanins like CD9, CD63, and CD81 and heat shock proteins, which facilitate membrane budding and cargo sorting, also leverage ceramide and sphingolipid metabolism promoting membrane curvature and vesicle release for cellular communication and molecular transport. Exosomes carry many macromolecules such as DNA, lipids, transcriptional regulators, signaling proteins, and diverse RNA species. Regulatory RNAs, such as miRNAs and lncRNAs, bind to target genes and mediate signaling pathways that influence immune system dynamics. Additionally, they contain tRNAs, snRNAs, snoRNAs, piwi-interacting RNAs (piRNAs), and mtDNA, dsDNA, and ssDNA. Furthermore, exosomes contain enzymes like GTPases, calcium-dependent phospholipid-binding proteins called Annexins, and membrane-associated proteins known as Flotillin. These include proteins that occupy endosomal multivesicle formation, i.e., Alix and TSG101. Heat shock proteins such as Hsc70 & Hsp 90 along with the tetraspanins CD9, CD63, CD81, and CD82, regulate exosome cargo sorting and release. The therapeutic cancer target CD151, or PETA-3, has shown that it is associated with sperm cells and mediates exosome biogenesis, playing vital roles in cellular processes via integrin and nonintegrin proteins. Approximately 4400 exosomal proteins bind directly to target cells. , Phospholipases, raft-associated lipids such as cholesterol, ceramide, sphingolipids, and phosphoglycerides with long and saturated fatty-acyl chains are also present. The overall biogenesis process of the exosomes and MVs from the cells is depicted in Figure .

1.

1

Schematic overview of biogenesis of the exosomes from the cell and the detailed structure of the exosome (created with Biorender.com).

2.1. Exosomes as Mediators of Cell-to-Cell Communication in Pregnancy

Cells utilize various mechanisms to communicate, including the release of soluble factors, direct adhesion interactions, tunneling nanotubules, etc., for unmediated association, thus facilitating cell-to-cell coordination. Exosomes have emerged as significant contributors to this dynamic process, uncovering a previously underestimated dimension of cellular communication. Initially believed as a cellular apparatus for disposing of debris, exosomes are now known to transport crucial molecules and are involved in the transfer of genetic information and biological signals to recipient cells via surface molecules such as exosomal integrins, engaging through membrane fusion, endocytosis or receptor binding. These tiny vesicles are present in maternal blood as well as in various biological fluids, crossing physiological barriers like the placental, endothelial, blood–brain barrier (BBB), and epithelial barrier. The placenta is a crucial organ in pregnancy that connects the fetus to the mother and releases exosomes into the maternal circulation, which are thought to originate from extravillous trophoblasts or syncytiotrophoblasts during the first trimester. Placenta-derived exosomes regulate cell migration and invasion, aiding placentation and maternofetal vascular development. The exosomes released are detectable at the onset of 6 weeks of pregnancy. This provides an opportunity to diagnose prenatal pregnancy complications and allows the development and assessment of suitable intervention strategies aimed at limiting acute unfavorable repercussions. The placental exosomes provide an essential conduit for communication between the placenta and maternal histological milieu in typical and advanced pregnancies. , There is strong evidence indicating that exosomes are involved in intercellular communication by transporting bioactive molecules, which are essential for mediating interactions between maternal and fetal systems. Exosomes’ versatility as cell-to-cell communication mediators is further demonstrated by their possible involvement in pregnancy-related problems. For example, disorders such as Intrauterine Growth Restriction (IUGR) and Gestational Diabetes (GD) have been associated with aberrant exosomal cargo or release patterns.

3. Mother-to-Child Transmission (Mtct) or Vertical Transmission

The human placenta releases various molecules and EVs to help the mother adapt to the developing fetus needs through vertical transmission. The growing fetus releases these vesicles, which comprise a variety of proteins and nucleic acids, including DNA, mRNAs, microRNAs, and long noncoding RNAs. The fetal and maternal cells internalize exosomes by a variety of routes like endocytosis, macropinocytosis, and phagocytosis mechanisms, and by fusing with endosomes, they release their cargos in the target cell’s cytoplasm. Also, the direct fusion of exosomal lipid and membrane protein with the recipient cell’s plasma membrane leads to internalization of exosomes. Furthermore, the selective uptake of the exosomes is carried out by the specific receptors present on the target cells. Studies have reported that microvesicles and exosomes, produced by the placenta in the first trimester, are absorbed by endothelial cells via phagocytosis and clathrin-mediated endocytosis, which is found to be organ-specific. To confirm this, researchers employed fluorescently tagged exosomes derived from fetal cells and subsequently injected into the amniotic fluid of pregnant mice, which modulate the maternal physiology to cause or adapt it to pregnancy-induced changes. Three different processes result in the release of exosomes: (i) endocytic vesicles’ plasma membrane penetration, (ii) endosomal membranes budding inward to form MVBs and (iii) MVBs fusing with the plasma membrane to release exosomal contents. Lipid compounds like ceramides and phosphatidic acid regulate exosome production and release, with the size influenced by their origin and lipid bilayer. Exosomes derived from the placenta can be detected in maternal blood as early as 6 weeks of gestation, and their concentration increases as the pregnancy progresses. microRNA-30d-5p, found in placental exosomes, has been shown to induce macrophage polarization into alternatively activated (M2) macrophages, promoting trophoblast migration and invasion while inhibiting endothelial cell tube formation and migration.

The placenta secretes exosomes into the mother’s blood early in pregnancy, aiding communication with other maternal organs, though their exact functions remain unclear. In the course of implantation and placentation, fetal-maternal communication is facilitated by exosomes and other EVs. They adjust the mother’s uterine vasculature, encourage fetal vasculogenesis, preserve cellular metabolic homeostasis, control maternal responses, and get the uterus ready for birth control. Exosomes derived from the placenta can be detected in maternal blood as early as 6 weeks of gestation, and their concentration increases as the pregnancy progresses. Researchers have observed the discharge of placenta-derived exosomes in both healthy and abnormal pregnancies into the mother’s blood. The presence of distinct miRNAs or proteins allows for the identification of these placenta-specific exosomes. These vesicles enable non-invasive liquid biopsies by transmitting between fetal and maternal compartments. Placental alkaline phosphatase (PLAP), a specific membrane protein lacking 24 amino acids from the N-terminal region, is a unique surface marker and target for the purification of placental EVs. Recent methods using quantum dots and antibodies targeting PLAP and CD63 measure placental exosomes in maternal plasma, helping assess placental and fetal development. Fetal-derived exosomes cross over to the maternal side during pregnancy and may carry signals to the uterus and cervix. These minuscule vesicles have been linked to inflammatory processes in the past and may possibly have a role in the commencement of labor. Exosomes are paracrine mediators in mice that may induce birth without the need for systemic progesterone withdrawal, which is typically required to induce labor. Surprisingly, these exosomes are also essential for the growth and survival of the fetus within the mother. Exosomes derived from the placenta can be detected in maternal blood as early as 6 weeks of gestation, and their concentration increases as the pregnancy progresses. microRNA-30d-5p, found in placental exosomes, has been shown to induce macrophage polarization into alternatively activated (M2) macrophages, promoting trophoblast migration and invasion while inhibiting endothelial cell tube formation and migration.

The number of placenta-derived exosomes in maternal plasma increases gradually during pregnancy, peaking at term. It is interesting to note that this growth starts much earlier than the whole development of intervillous circulation in the first trimester. Extravillous trophoblast invasion and proliferation are facilitated by factors such as hypoxia and hyperglycemia in the uterus, which cause syncytiotrophoblasts to produce more exosomes. For instance, placental exosomes have been shown to induce maternal immune tolerance by interacting with maternal immune cells, leading to the reprogramming of circulating monocytes. Exosomes have been studied via trophoblast cultures, chorionic villi explants, placental perfusion, and maternal plasma analysis. The research includes their roles in fetal–maternal exchange, implantation, and angiogenesis, with genetically modified mice used to differentiate exosome types. Remarkably, exosomes were transferred across placental boundaries from mother to fetus and from fetal to mother (Figure ). Fetal exosomes have been found in mother plasma, which raises the possibility that they might be used as noninvasive pregnancy indicators.

2.

2

Schematic representation of maternal-to-fetal barrier of circulations and places of appearance of exosomes and development of the placenta concerning the maternal–fetal interface. The exosomes vertical transmission from tthe placenta to the maternal circulation and from the maternal side to the fetus (created with Biorender.com).

3.1. Roles of RNA and Exosomes during Vertical Transmission

The transfer of particular cargo molecules is intimately associated with exosomal bioactivity. Interestingly, noncoding RNAs (ncRNAs) make up a large fraction of transcripts in the human genome and are involved in complex regulatory networks. Researchers frequently utilize length to group ncRNAs. Long ncRNAs (lncRNAs) are longer than 200 ribonucleotides, whereas small ncRNAs, or microRNAs (miRNAs), are usually less than 200 ribonucleotides. Furthermore, a new type of noncoding RNAs called circular RNAs (circRNAs), has been identified. The miRNAs are integral to fundamental physiological processes such as cell migration, differentiation, and proliferation and are critically involved in the development and progression of various diseases, including cancer and immune-related disorders. These mature single-stranded miRNAs, processed through protein complexes, primarily function by utilizing the RNA-induced silencing complex (RISC) to induce post-transcriptional gene silencing, wherein RISC binds to recognition sequences in the 3′-untranslated region (UTR) of target mRNAs, leading to translational inhibition or mRNA instability; intriguingly, recent studies suggest that miRNAs might also enhance the expression of certain genes. , Moreover, cells release miRNAs in a variety of ways, including as free molecules linked to protein complexes, encapsulated within exosomes and other EVs, and connected with lipoproteins. , Because exosomal miRNAs are stable in bodily fluids and play essential roles in physiological and pathological processes, they have great potential for use in diagnostic and therapeutic applications. LncRNAs, which have a high degree of variability, are derived from genomic regions that code for proteins that are exonic, intergenic, or distal. , Among their unique characteristics are 5′-splicing, 3′-polyadenylation, and thermodynamic stability. Changes in the expression levels of several lncRNAs have been linked to a variety of illnesses, even if the precise processes behind them are still unknown. Subcellular localization patterns are displayed by lncRNAs: cytoplasmic lncRNAs mainly affect post-transcriptional gene expression, whereas nuclear lncRNAs are related to epigenetic gene control. These molecules function as miRNA sponges, recruiters, competitors, and precursors of miRNA in their interactions with other biomolecules. , Exosomal lncRNAs engage in intercellular communication by conveying data and causing alterations in nearby or remote cells and can be potential biomarkers for a variety of illnesses due to their tissue selectivity, greater concentration than other EVs, and resistance to enzyme destruction. Researchers are also exploring exosomes with miRNAs like miRNA-141 for delivering therapeutic nucleic acids, as these increase in maternal plasma during pregnancy. Placenta-associated miRNAs are found in the chromosome 19 miRNA cluster (C19MC), which is essential for placental-maternal transmission.

Furthermore, exosomes help fetal defense against viral infections by transferring certain miRNAs to cells apart from placental ones. Table describes the role of different exosomal RNAs in pregnancy. EVs generated from synctiotrophoblast have also been found to contain tRNA fragments. The adhesive potential of trophoblasts is increased by endometrial epithelial cells’ exosomes. Exosomal miR-30d upregulates integrin-related genes to enhance preimplantation embryo adhesion in a mouse model. Moreover, exosomal miR-520c-3p affects chorionic villous trophoblast cell invasion. Unique protein profiles throughout the cyclic and pregnant phases were found by evaluating the vesicle proteins in the uterine luminal fluid of sheep. These proteins may affect the results of implantation and fertility including prostaglandin synthase, lipoprotein lipase, gastrin-releasing peptide, and cathepsin L1. The meconium and extra-embryonic components that make up the mother–fetus interface are crucial in regulating the mother’s immune system to suit the growing fetus. Trophoblast cells activate the JNK and p38 signaling cascades in meconium macrophages by releasing ZEB2-AS1, an exosomal long noncoding RNA. This mechanism encourages an environment that is favorable for maternal–fetal immunological tolerance by encouraging macrophages to adopt a less inflammatory M2 phenotype. Once activated, these M2 macrophages respond by encouraging the growth and differentiation of trophoblast cells, which are vital to the advancement of a normal pregnancy. In contrast, mothers who have had repeated spontaneous miscarriages were discovered to have fewer M2 macrophages during metaphase; this may be because the trophoblast-derived exosomes contain less ZEB2-AS1. By limiting negative maternal immune responses and giving the placenta and fetal allografts immunological privileges in the uterus, apoptotic mechanisms which are aided by the secretion of FasL and TRAIL from early and term human placentas may help preserve pregnancy. These results emphasize the function of placental exosomes as complex channels for cellular communication, emphasizing their importance in establishing fetal immune privilege and preserving balance at the maternal–fetal nexus throughout gestation. The interaction of the blastocyst with a receptive uterus culminates in close contact with the endometrium during the crucial phase of gestation known as embryo implantation. This moment, which signifies the embryo’s successful implantation into the mother organism, is crucial to mammalian reproduction. According to research conducted in vitro, epithelial and stromal cells in the meconium may be able to change the local immunological environment through the consumption of placenta-derived exosomes (PEXOs), which would help to initiate and maintain pregnancy. At the maternal–fetal interface, exosomes play a critical role in the exchange of signals. Specifically, embryonic exosomes improve the embryo’s capacity to adapt, promote successful implantation, and initiate gestation. These vesicles also affect the expression of genes, including Bcl2, Bax, Casp3, and Tp53, that are linked to apoptosis in endometrial epithelial cells before implantation and bolster the expression of adhesion proteins postimplantation to support further attachment.

1. Different Physiological Roles of Exosomal RNA during Pregnancy.

sr. no. exosomal RNA type genes affected biological functions reference
1. miR-451a miRNA ATF2 Cell cycle regulation, Proapoptotic protein regulation
2. miR-185-5p miRNA RHOA, ATF6, and CDC42, MDM2, PKD1 Cell Migration, Cytoskeletal Formation, Cell Motility, ER Stress ,
3. miR-4535-3p miRNA CD44, LHFPL3, KDM1B, RNF19A, C19orf82, and FKBP4 Regulation, Tumor Suppression, Diagnostic Biomarker
4. miR-1-3p miRNA GOLPH3, JUP, STAT6, CD206, E2F5, PFTK1: Differentiation, Proliferation, Tumor Progression, Muscle Development, ,
5. miR-183-5p miRNA FOXO1, SNAI2, ZEB1, E2F1, CTNNA2 Invasion, Angiogenesis, Cell Cycle Regulation, Cell Adhesion ,
6. miR-186-5p miRNA AKT, VEGF, BCL2, ANXA9, XIAP, FGF2, RelA, TLR3, CALM2 Proliferation, Migration, Cell Signaling, Apoptosis, Angiogenesis, Ca2+ Regulation ,
7. miR-20a-5p miRNA E2F1, PTEN, THBS1, Rab27B, IRF9, PPP6C Cell Cycle, Apoptosis, Cell Proliferation ,
8. miR-26b-5p miRNA CCND2, MCL1, TLR3, COL10A1, EZH2, COPS2, KPNA2, MRPL15, NOL12, PDE4B, CDK4 Diagnostic, Monitoring, Thyroid Carcinoma, Osteoarthritis, Immune Response, Cell Proliferation ,
9. miR-30a-5p miRNA Beclin-1, ATG5, PTEN, SNAI1, CBFB, RRM2, AHNAK, DCBLD1 Diagnostic, Prognostic, Renal Cell Carcinoma, Mesothelioma, Cell Survival, Apoptosis, Cell Cycle Progression ,
10. miR-143-3p miRNA KRAS, ERK5, Vimentin, CXCR4, SNAI1, CDH1, MYC, MMP-1 Diagnostic, Gastric Cancer, Cell Structure maintenance, Immune Response, Cell Adhesion, Apoptosis ,
11. miR-96-5p miRNA FOXO1, PTEN, ZDHHC5, Aqp5, Celsr2, Myrip, Odf2, Ryk Diagnostic, Acute Myocardial Infarction, Ovarian Cancer
12. miR-122-5p miRNA CCNG1, ADAM17, SLC1A5, TP53, CCNG1, ADAM10, IGF1R Diagnostic, Prognostic, Hepatocellular Carcinoma, AcuteMyocardial Infarction, Cell Cycle Regulation
13. miR-302a miRNA Cyclin D1, E2F1, E2F7, AKT1, CDKN1A, CDKN1B, TGFBR2, RAB5C, GAB2, ERKs Diagnostic, Germ Cell Tumors, Intracranial Germ Cell Tumors, Cell cycle Regulator, Cell Signaling Endocytosis, ,
14. miR-501-3p miRNA MEF2D, TGFBR3, ACTR2, CDH1, COL1A1, RBBP5, RRM1, TPM3 Diagnostic, Alzheimer’s Disease, Synaptic Biomarker, Muscle Differentiation ,
15. miR-144-3p miRNA ABCA1, FoxO1, Cyclin D1, CDK2, CDC25A Diagnostic, Depression, Adipogenesis, Forensic Body Fluid Identification, Cholesterol Metabolism ,
16. miR-302a-5p miRNA CDK2, CCND1, HMGA2, AKT1, CDKN1A, CDKN1B, TGFBR2 Diagnostic, Prognostic, Endometrial Carcinoma, Cell Cycle Control
17. lncR_H19 lncRNA Let-7, CaMKIIδ Tumorigenesis, Apoptosis, Diagnostic Biomarker, Endometrial tolerance, Successful implantation of fetus
18. lncR_ZEB2-AS1 lncRNA ZEB2 Oncogenic, Tumorigenesis, Diagnostic Marker
19. lncR_MALAT1 lncRNA PGAM1, PGAM4, NOL6, NAP1L5, SESN1 Chemotherapy Resistance, Tumorigenesis, Prognostic Biomarker, Placental Implantation
20. lncR_XIST lncRNA EZH2, CDK6 Prognostic Biomarker, Oncogene, Treatment Response ,

Human ectodermal stromal cell exosomes promote the development of endothelial tubes, a crucial step in the angiogenesis process, in addition to increasing trophoblast calmodulin synthesis, which improves invasive capacities. Mice experiments have shown that the administration of exosomes produced from embryonic stem cells can increase implantation rates and enhance the potential for implantation overall, resulting in improved blastocyst formation, embryo quality, and future development. Loaded with various proteins and nucleic acids, exosomes function as precise diagnostic indicators of pregnancy-related diseases. Examining exosomal lncRNAs can help identify biomarkers, provide a new basis for illness diagnosis and therapy, and shed light on the pathophysiology of several disorders linked to abnormal pregnancies. Numerous lncRNAs that control the activities of tumor cells may also have a major impact on trophoblasts, considering the parallels in proliferation, migration, and invasion between placental trophoblasts and tumor cells. This is especially noticeable in the pathways controlling cell cycle regulation, cellular invasion and migration, and angiogenesis. For example, lncRNA MALAT1 can suppress angiogenesis, cell cycle progression, apoptosis trophoblast development, migration, and invasion as well as recombinant hexokinase 2 (HK2) through its interaction with miR-216a-5p. Maternal peripheral blood can be used to identify PEXOs, which are rich in trophoblast-specific proteins, such as PLAP and HLA-G, and exosomal markers, such as CD9, CD63, and CD81. The concentration of PEXOs has the potential to be used as a predictor of fetal development and pregnancy viability. Changes in the nature and number of these exosomes might have a detrimental effect on target cells’ ability to function, according to histological investigations of these exosomes in a variety of illnesses.

4. Role of Exosomes: Preeclampsia

Preeclampsia (PE), a severe and prevalent condition that may be referred to as “Gestohypertoxemia,” is defined as new-onset gestational hypertension after 20 weeks of pregnancy in tandem with proteinuria (creatinine ratio ≥30 mg/mmol, ≥300 mg/24 h, or ≥2+ on dipstick) high blood pressure (160/110 mmHg) and end-organ-damage that possess the risk of mortality and morbidity for both mother and the fetus. , In 2024 alone, PE is a stealthy predator, causing 76,000 maternal and 500,000 neonatal deaths annually, especially in healthcare-scarce regions. Affecting about 2–10% of pregnancies, its prevalence has steadily increased over the past 30 years. The American Heart Association (AHA) has issued guidelines recognizing a history of PE as a distinct factor for cardiovascular disease. PE beginning in early pregnancy is characterized by reduced placental perfusion due to impaired extravillous trophoblast invasion and inadequate spiral artery remodeling, leading to shallow placentation and diminished perfusion. To allow for a more precise prognosis and prevention of this disorder, a thorough evaluation of the etiology and pathogenesis of PE is necessary. The condition involves early chronic inflammation, with leukocyte activation and high cytokine levels. Tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) is a multifunctional cytokine that triggers vascular dysfunction through disturbances in angiogenesis by enhancing the expression of intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1) on endothelial cells and trophoblasts, contributing to PE. These factors lead to poor angiogenesis, reduced placental growth factor (PlGF), and uteroplacental retardation, ultimately resulting in PE. , The severity of preeclampsia varies from mild to severe and can lead to complications such as Eclampsia and the “HELLP” syndrome (hemolysis, increased liver enzymes, and low platelet count). Exosomes play a cornerstone role in preeclampsia, as placenta-derived exosomes released from syncytiotrophoblast cells into the perinatal systemic milieu exhibit fluctuating levels in patients with preeclampsia compared to those with normal pregnancies i.e., 1.47-fold and 1.45-fold higher. , Due to elevated levels of sFlt-1 (soluble fms-like tyrokinase-1) and sEng (soluble Endoglin), which are linked to vascular dysfunction, exosomes may affect distant organs through immune modulation and extracellular matrix formation. Reports indicate that higher concentrations of exosomes are observed in preeclampsia, suggesting their potential as biomarkers for this intricate pathophysiological condition. These variations could be utilized for early diagnosis of preeclampsia. In addition, Ermini et al. (2017) stated that the exosomes deriving from PE were potentially implicated in promoting vascular dysfunction due to their high content of sFlt-1 and sEng. Increased levels of sFlt-1 and sEng contained in exosomes are responsible for impaired vascular angiogenesis and also contribute to the pathogenesis of preeclampsia since they deplete the PlGF level for reduced angiogenesis during placentation. , In PE patients, the elevated concentrations of circulating sFlt-1 interact with the VEGF-1 receptors on the endothelial cells, thereby interfering with endothelial cell communication, leading to vascular dysfunction, hypertension and decreased levels of VEGF and PlGF.

MicroRNAs such as miR-210, miR-155, and miR-29b represent the hypoxia-induced miRNA group, also referred to as hypoxamiRs. These appear to offer great promise as biomarkers for monitoring pregnancies affected by preeclampsia. The role of miR-210 seems to be of utmost significance for cell proliferation in response to DNA damage, mitochondrial oxidative metabolism, and angiogenesis. , Enhanced levels of miR-210 inhibited cell migration trophoblast invasion, plus its elevated levels are found in preeclampsia patients. Hypoxic induction of miR-155 in HUVECs (human umbilical vein endothelial cells) makes it challenging to regulate angiogenic responses. Whereas miR-155 is said to be negatively regulated by the overexpression of LNC00240 (Long intergenic nonprotein coding RNA 240) on trophoblasts in preeclampsia, which inhibits the oxidative stress-induced pyroptosis by silencing the miR-155. Histone deacetylase 4 (HDAC4) modulates the motility of trophoblast cells, and this modulation can actually be counteracted by miR-29b since it induces apoptosis and inhibits invasion and angiogenesis of trophoblast cells. A recent study reported that syncytiotrophoblast-derived extracellular vesicles from preeclampsia placentae (preeclampsia-STBEVs) stimulate LOX-1, which causes endothelial dysfunction. Preeclampsia-STBEVs lowered nitric oxide’s role in relaxation, which TS20 prevented. Superoxide dismutase or apocynin, an inhibitor of NOX (nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate oxidase), reversed decreased endothelial-dependent vasodilation in arteries exposed to preeclampsia-STBEVs (Figure ). The exploration of exosomes unveils a new frontier in the fight against preeclampsia. These nanoscale messengers, with their capacity to influence immune responses and vascular dynamics, present a novel biomarker for early detection. Embracing the potential of exosomes could lead to groundbreaking advancements in therapeutic interventions, paving the way for healthier pregnancies and improved maternal–fetal outcomes in this intricate gestational disorder.

3.

3

Placenta-derived extracellular vesicles from preeclamptic pregnancies impair vascular endothelial function via lectin-like oxidized LDL receptor-1. (A) Schematic representation of the comparative normal pregnancy vs preeclampsia condition in pregnancy (created with Biorender.com), (B) confocal microscopy images showing the uptake and internal localization of STBEVs in (80 μg/mL) for 4 h, (C) immunofluorescence and confocal microscopy images for LOX-1 and PLAP STBEV expression, (D) NF-κB location visualized by immunofluorescence and confocal microscopy in HUVECs treated with or without PE-STBEVs in the absence or presence of TS20 (LOX-1 inhibitor), (E) confocal microscopy images for nitrotyrosine (indicative of nitrative stress in HUVECs) treated with PE-STBEVs in the absence or the presence of TS20, (F–I) concentration response curve of methylcholine (MCh)-induced vasodilation in preconstricted mesenteric arteries incubated overnight with or without PE-STBEVs and with or without TS20, SOD, apocynin, and L-NAME (N­[G]-nitro-l-arginine methyl ester), (J) confocal microscopy of NOX2 (nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate oxidase 2) in mesenteric arteries incubated overnight with or without PE-STBEVs. (Reproduced with permission from ref . Copyright @2023 American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Journals.)

5. Role of Exosomes: Gestational Diabetes Mellitus

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) represents impaired glucose tolerance, which occurs for the first time during pregnancy. Its incidence correlates with the rising prevalence of obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Women diagnosed with GDM face an increased risk of developing hypertension, potentially leading to complications such as preeclampsia or Eclampsia during pregnancy. GDM is considered to have multiple contributing factors, although its etiology remains unclear. A recent umbrella review encompassing 30 meta-analyses identified 61 potential risk factors, highlighting common associations such as overweight or obesity, family history of diabetes, hypothyroidism, sleep-disordered breathing, and polycystic ovary syndrome. GDM can strike at any point during pregnancy, typically between 24 and 28 weeks. Early detection and management are crucial because GDM can have adverse short- and long-term consequences for both the mother and baby. Unfortunately, there’s also a high chance (up to 48%) of GDM recurring in a future pregnancy. Unraveling the global prevalence of GDM gets tricky due to differing standards for diagnosis across regions. A recent large-scale study by Saeedi et al. 2021 estimated that 14.7% of pregnancies globally are affected by GDM. In 2019, a meta-analysis that used the same diagnostic criteria revealed a significant geographic disparity in GDM rates. The highest pooled prevalence, at 11.4%, was observed in South Asia (Bangladesh, India, and Sri Lanka), compared to a much lower range of 3.6–6.0% in other parts of the world. The pathogenesis of GDM is complex and is not fully understood. Research suggests a combination of factors might be at play, including insulin resistance, inflammation, oxidative stress, adipose tissue, and endothelial cell dysfunction.

Studies are uncovering the potential of EVs to shed new light on the mechanisms behind them. These membrane-encapsulated particles are released by cells into their extracellular environment under both physiological and stress conditions, including injury or cell death. , Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are present in several biological fluids including blood, cerebrospinal fluid, tears, urine, and ascites. During pregnancy, EVs originating from the placenta can be detected in the mother’s bloodstream as early as 6 weeks into gestation, and their levels rise as the pregnancy advances. In women with GDM, the total number of exosomes in maternal plasma between 11 and 14 weeks of gestation is up to two times greater compared to non-GDM pregnancies. Exosomes derived from the placenta participate in maternal changes of islets maladaptation during GDM., which are significantly promotes β cell apoptosis, impairs the GSIS in vitro, and directly causes impaired glucose intolerance in pregnant mice (Figure ). Exosomes released from trophoblasts in GDM patients induce the secretion of proinflammatory cytokines (IL-18, IL-1β) and promote the proliferation, migration, and tube formation of umbilical vein endothelial cells. Additionally, in diabetic patients, microRNA-326 is upregulated, which negatively correlates with its target, adiponectin, potentially mediating the inflammatory responses typically associated with GDM. However, the results regarding several microRNA candidates as biomarkers for GDM are often inconsistent. Changes in EV biogenesis are frequently found in cardiovascular diseases, including diabetes, and can be measured in altered amounts in various biofluids. Depending on the source of the EVs investigated, such as plasma, urine, or other biofluids, these variations may reflect diabetes consequences such as endothelial injury, kidney damage, or, in the setting of pregnancy, placental stress. A study by James-Allan and co-workers found that pregnant women had significantly higher levels of EVs in their blood compared to nonpregnant women. Interestingly, these levels were even higher in pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). This suggests that the placenta might be releasing more EVs in pregnancies with GDM. In recent years, interest in the research on exosomes during pregnancy has been growing. A prospective study found that visceral fat thickness might predict GDM by regulating the miRNA-148 family of adipose-derived exosomes. A study conducted on obese mice found that their exosomes were enhanced with microRNAs, which caused glucose intolerance and insulin resistance in lean mice. This effect was initially attributed to the role of adipose-derived exosomal miRNAs in metabolic dysregulation. Further research has demonstrated that visceral adipose tissue exosomes modulate miRNA-148a and miRNA-148b expression, leading to impaired insulin signaling. These findings suggest that dysregulated miRNA expression in adipose-derived exosomes, driven by visceral fat accumulation, may play an important role in the pathogenesis of GDM. However, there are a panel of miRNA that has been studied extensively in recent years which are studied by Liu, et al. (2021), who found a significant upregulation of miR-98 derived from the placenta at a gestation of 37–40 weeks in GDM (n = 193) compared to normoglycemic pregnancies (n = 202), suggesting its involvement in insulin resistance. A recent study demonstrated a significant reduction in miRNA expression in GDM. Specifically, miRNA-148a levels were reduced by 45% in the normal-weight (NW) GDM group and by 61% in the overweight/obese (OW/OB) GDM group compared with the NW non-GDM group. Similarly, miRNA-30b levels were 65% lower in the NW GDM group and 64% lower in the OW/OB GDM group relative to the NW non-GDM group. These findings emphasized the critical need for integrating quantitative analyses to elucidate the diagnostic and prognostic potential of exosomal miRNAs in GDM. As well as Chen et al. 2022 reported a significantly higher concentration of placenta-derived exosomes in GDM patients (∼2.2-fold, ∼1.5-fold, and ∼1.8-fold increase at respective gestational ages) compared to normal pregnancies, demonstrating that, maternal hyperglycemia enhances placental exosome release into circulation. Further investigation into the mechanisms of exosomes in both normal pregnancy and GDM will enhance our understanding of the function of circulating exosomes in patients with GDM and the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying GDM. This knowledge could provide a basis for improving pregnancy outcomes by enabling the development of better diagnostic and therapeutic strategies.

4.

4

Role of exosomes in gestational diabetes. (A) Total exosome number presented as the average across early, mid, and late gestation (reproduced with permission from ref . Copyright @2016 American diabetes association). (B) Visualization of the exosomes released from chorionic villi explants by electron microscopy and representative exosome marker Alix, CD63, and TSG101 were measured by Western blot analysis, (C) Concentration of exosomes from normal and GDM pregnancies, (D) glucose tolerance test (GTT), (E) insulin tolerance test (ITT) performed on a cohort of high-fat (GDM) diet- and control (CTR)-fed pregnant dams at gestational day 12.5, (F) glucose-stimulated insulin secretion (GSIS), (G) insulin content during GSIS tests, (H) mice placenta-derived exosomes uptake in MIN6 cells and islets after 24 h of coculture, (I) fluorescence microscopy of treated islets stained with TUNEL signals (red) and DAPI (nucleus, blue), (J) apoptosis was measured by the 7AAD-Annexin V test and presented by the histogram graph, (K) glucose tolerance test (GTT) on control pregnant recipient mice after adoptive transfer of PBS, Exo-CTR, and Exo-GDM mice at GD16.5. (Reproduced from ref . Available under a CC-BY 4.0 license. Copyright 2024 The Authors. Published by Frontiers on behalf of Fronteirs of Endocrinology.)

6. Role of Exosomes in Pregnancy Loss and Preterm Birth

The first trimester, which marks the early stages of pregnancy, is a critical period for expectant mothers, as pregnancy loss (PL) during this time is the most common complication requiring attention. Recent statistics reveal a heartbreaking figure, in which 23% of cases reported specifically in the first trimester (≤12 weeks) are attributable to miscarriage, whereas the scenario is equally alarming, with 42.39 million cases of pregnancy loss reported worldwide. PL is a routinely encountered complication, affecting about 15% of apparently healthy couples. Recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) is defined as three or more consecutive losses before 12 weeks of gestation, although some guidelines require only two cases for categorizing the condition to be RPL. RPL affects 1–3% of all couples. This high prevalence is primarily attributed to genetic abnormalities, endocrinological issues, thrombophilic autoimmune and alloimmune disorders, and uterine abnormalities. Thereby, the said conditions are treated as severe risk factors for RPL. , The mechanisms involved in RPL pathogenesis include insufficient trophoblast invasion, villitis, and placental vessel microthrombi. The key concern is not limited to a single occurrence; patients with recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) face a higher risk of complications in subsequent pregnancies, as well. Therefore, accurate diagnostic tools for predicting RPL have become a necessity not only for diagnosis but also for a basic understanding of the syndrome. Study shows that preterm birth occurred in mice treated with late gestation-derived exosome-treated mice, which increased inflammatory mediators in the cervix, uterus, and fetal membranes but not in the placenta, which was not observed in mice injected with early gestation exosomes. This suggests that exosomes function as paracrine mediators of labor and delivery (Figure ). In modern healthcare settings, there has been an emerging interest in the diagnostic potential of EVs. These small plasma membrane vesicles are essential for intercellular communication and are implicated in various pathological processes. EVs perform numerous functions, including critical roles within the immune system, and they condense and protect their cargo within the vesicles. Emerging evidence increasingly suggests that increased placental oxidative stress plays a significant role in the pathogenesis of early pregnancy loss, primarily by delaying trophoblast invasion. The elevation in oxidative stress is known to induce DNA damage within the placental tissue. Research on exosomal DNA damage in recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) is expanding, with studies indicating that abnormal DNA methylation may contribute to RPL by influencing implantation, fetal growth, and development. The abnormal DNA methylation of imprinted, placenta-specific, immune-related genes and sperm DNA may influence embryo implantation, growth, and development, ultimately contributing to RPL. Furthermore, it disrupts the protein-folding mechanism, leading to an augmented production of misfolded proteins. An elevated level of cellular senescence is frequently associated with various pregnancy complications, including preeclampsia and miscarriages. Recent studies have also identified exosomal microRNAs as key regulators of oxidative stress responses in the placenta, highlighting their potential as biomarkers for early pregnancy loss.One of the mechanisms by which exosomes regulate trophoblast invasion is through the transfer of miRNAs that influence trophoblast migration and proliferation. The miR-486-5p affects the activity of the trophoblast. In this study, the author found that this exosomal miR-486-5p influences trophoblast cell function by targeting the IGF1 signaling pathway, thus controlling proliferation and invasion. Another study highlighted the mechanism by which MSC-derived exosomes regulate trophoblast invasion. According to this study, MSC-derived exosomes, carrying high levels of H19, promote trophoblast invasion and migration and suppress apoptosis by decreasing let-7b, increasing FOXO1, and activating the AKT pathway. According to some previous study findings, the present report demonstrated that in cases of miscarriage proteins linked to senescence, DNA damage, and endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress are not released via EVs as typically expected. Instead, these proteins accumulate within placental tissue. Recent investigations have clarified that placental EVs derived from complicated pregnancies can significantly impact the function of target cells by releasing their cargo, which includes harmful proteins such as misfolded proteins and Mixed Lineage Kinase domain-like (MLKL) proteins. It is evident that misfolded proteins are associated with PE. These proteins, including amyloid β-peptide, α-1 antitrypsin, albumin, IgG k-free light chains, and ceruloplasmin, are dysregulated in PE, leading to the deposition of amyloid-like aggregates in the placenta and body fluids. This accumulation of proteins induces ER stress, activating the unfolded protein response (UPR) to promote ER-associated degradation and maintain ER homeostasis. A study conducted by Zhang and researchers revealed that elevated levels of three senescence-repair-associated proteins (RPA-70, PMSE-4, and PAK-2) were observed in placental EVs. However, these proteins were found at lower levels in placental tissue from missed miscarriages. Interestingly, when EV formation or release was inhibited using GW4869, the expression levels of these three proteins increased in GW4869-treated placental explants from missed miscarriage cases. This suggests that the “inadvertent” sorting and export of senescence-repair-associated proteins by the EVs secreted from the placenta may be linked to the abnormal functioning in the development of the placenta observed in miscarriages. Thus, placental EVs play a crucial role in modulating placenta function and may have significant implications for understanding and diagnosing pregnancy complications.

5.

5

Role of Exosomes in preterm birth. (A) Experimental design for PBS and exosome injections to determine the functional role of early (E9), and late gestation (E18) exosomes in vivo, (B, C) a representative cryo-electron microscopy image and NTA analysis of exosome from early gestation (E9) and late gestation (E18), (D) graphical representation of inflammatory changes during mouse pregnancy, also reflected in exosomes throughout gestation, (E) Bio plex analysis of maternal plasma progesterone, IL-6, and TNF-α in PBS, E9, and E18-injected mice, (F) fluorescently labeled exosomes injected into pregnant mice traffic to the cervix, uterus, fetal membranes, and placenta and representative H&E staining for orientation and localization, (G, H) exosomes injected into pregnant mice induce labor-associated changes in the cervix and uterus evaluate by western blot analysis and densitometry quantitation, and (I) preterm birth rates in PBS, E9, and E18 exosome-injected mice. (Reproduced from ref . Available under a CC-BY 4.0 license. Copyright 2019 The Authors. Published by Nature on behalf of Scientific Reports).

7. Immunomodulatory Role of Exosomes in Pregnancy

Cellular communication, particularly in higher life forms such as mammals, by and large, remains one of the most intricate physiological processes at the molecular scale. Exosomes are secreted by diverse cell types in both prokaryotes and eukaryotes, encompassing immune cells like B and T-lymphocytes and associated signaling mechanisms in humans, and play a pivotal role in gestational dynamics. These pathways have been extensively investigated in recent years, as they are prime drivers for vesicle secretion at all times for the information exchange among the cells to maintain homeostasis. Recent literature has revealed novel exosome signaling pathways in immune tolerance during pregnancy, emphasizing the crucial role of extracellular vesicles (EVs) in maternal–fetal immune modulation, thus, significantly advancing our understanding. Exosomes secreted by trophoblasts and immune cells have been shown to carry essential proteins, RNAs, and miRNAs that regulate maternal immune adaptation. As an illustration, IL-35-expressing exosomes have been characterized as a crucial element in preventing maternal immune rejection of the fetus by modulating T-cell responses. In the state of pregnancy, it becomes inevitable for the maternal immune system to develop tolerance toward the semi/fully allogeneic fetus and overcome immune intervention through suppression mechanisms to support the maternal adaptation to pregnancy. Mechanisms, like the β-catenin and PI3K/Akt signaling pathways activated by mesenchymal stem cell-derived exosomes (MSC-Exos), have been found to promote vascular remodeling and immune tolerance, offering new therapeutic prospects for pregnancy-related disorders. Exosomes are crucial players as they facilitate fetal–maternal communication and thus significantly reduce the possibilities for fetal rejection. The placenta is established between the developing fetus and the mother around 5–6 days after conception. It stretches up to 20 cm in length and 3 cm in thickness and performs all-round functions viz immune, endocrine, respiration, circulation, and nutrition, thus becoming responsible for the definitive growth of the fetus. The placenta is also a generous source of secretion of exosomes that carry immunomodulatory molecules to protect the fetus against maternal immune attack. Placental trophoblast cells from the inner lining of the fetal side of the placenta and secret exosomes that carry cargo molecules like Human Leukocyte Antigen-G (HLA)-G molecules, cytokines and chemokines, MHC molecules, micro and noncoding RNAs, Fas ligand (FasL), galantines, etc. that modulates subpopulations of the maternal immune cells like B and T lymphocytes and aids in regulating the proliferation of these cells.

Fetal endothelial cells are observed as early as the third and fourth week of gestation and are involved in the development of vasculature in the fetus. These cells release exosomes containing angiogenic factors viz., Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) and Placental Growth Factor (PlGF) that bind to the receptors of the abundant uterine NK cells, thus triggering the production of anti-inflammatory cytokines, which influences the formation of more immune tolerant space for the fetal growth. The outer layer of the placenta is lined by the syncytiotrophoblast cells that are observed during the sixth–eighth week of gestation, secreting specialized extracellular vesicles. Syncytiotrophoblast-derived exosomes carry immunosuppressive biomolecules such as lipids and nucleic acids that act upon maternal dendritic cells and NK cells to suppress their activity. They also aid in maintaining immune tolerance at the maternal–fetal interface by suppressing inflammatory responses. Another study illustrated that the STAT1/IRF1 pathway is a crucial regulator in exosome-mediated immune tolerance, particularly through the polarization of decidual macrophages. In addition to that, they release cytokine regulatory factors to monitor the levels of proinflammatory ones (TNF-α) to cease the probability of future complications and special ligands like TNF-related apoptosis-inducing ligand (TRAIL), which is an immunosuppressive agent and induces apoptosis in active PBMCs. Similarly, the other cells of the placenta, like fetal hematopoietic and fetal epithelial cells, also secrete exosomes pool, potentially contributing to the Immunomodulation of maternal innate and adaptive immune cells.

Exosomal microRNAs (miRNAs) from placental origin are crucial elements for the regulation of maternal–fetal immune tolerance, modulating innate and adaptive immune responses to preserve pregnancy. The mechanistic background of their functional dynamics shares significant parallels with immune evasion strategies observed in cancer and infectious diseases. The placenta actively releases extracellular vesicles (EVs) rich in miRNAs, encompassing members of the chromosome 19 microRNA cluster (C19MC), which aid in maternal immune activation suppression, thus promoting immune tolerance. These exosomal miRNAs target antigen-presenting cells (APCs), lowering the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class II and costimulatory molecules (CD80/CD86) expression, thereby compromising dendritic cell (DC) function and antigen presentation. T cells (Tregs) are instigated by placental exosomal miRNAs viz., miR-517a and miR-146a by upregulating transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β) and interleukin-10 (IL-10), transforming maternal immunity toward an anti-inflammatory state. Along with that, miR-378a and miR-29a downregulate the natural killer (NK) cell activation receptor NKG2D, downregulating NK cytotoxicity against trophoblast cells and warranting fetal survival. Another critical mechanism involves miRNA-mediated upregulation of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1), which advocates maternal CD8+ T-cell exhaustion, a strategy mirroring immune checkpoint activation in tumors. Such immune-modulatory processes of placental exosomal miRNAs are not specific to pregnancy but are also extrapolated by cancer cells and infectious pathogens for immune evasion. miRNAs e.g., miR-105 and miR-200, etc are packaged into tumor-derived exosomes in case of cancer which advances epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) while also enhancing PD-L1 expression, resulting in T-cell dysfunction and immune escape. Tumors also utilize miRNAs such as miR-21 and miR-146a to suppress IFN-γ production, reducing CD8+ T-cell cytotoxicity, thus systematically imitating placental immune tolerance mechanisms. Similarly, viral and bacterial pathogens also exploit exosomal miRNAs to evade immune surveillance. For instance, viral miRNAs are incorporated into exosomes by Epstein–Barr virus (EBV) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) to subdue type I interferon responses, inhibiting JAK/STAT signaling, and blockage of antigen presentation. The placenta’s capability to modulate immune tolerance via exosomal miRNAs suggests an evolutionary modification that tumors and pathogens utilize to evade immune clearance.

Immune reprogramming of maternal monocytes, dendritic cells (DCs), and NK cells is yet another attribute of exosomes in the gestational landscape. Fang et al., 2024 suggest that the placenta-derived exosomes carrying miR-29a-3p suppress decidual NK cell IF-Y production, promoting immune tolerance but dysregulation in unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss (uRPL) patients, leading to altered NK cytotoxicity. The reprogramming of maternal monocytes via exosomal miRNAs (e.g., miR-410-5p) induces M2 macrophage polarization by means of STAT1 inhibition, which is disintegrated in preeclampsia and fetal growth restriction (IUGR). Trophoblastic exosomes with HLA-G influence monocyte-derived DC differentiation, transferring them toward tolerogenic DCs, indispensable for maternal immune adaptation (Mincheva-Nilsson, 2024). Aberrations in exosomal HLA-G cargo correspond with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and preterm birth. Placental exosomes also govern NK cell activation via TGF-β1 and galectin-1 cargo, which leads to decreased secretion of granzyme B, which is impaired in preeclampsia, resulting in amplified maternal NK cytotoxicity and trophoblast apoptosis. The role of exosomes in maternal pregnancy tolerance is so extensive that apart from the placenta-associated cells of the fetus, a myriad of extracellular vesicles are being released from the maternal half as well, viz., exosomes from Myeloid-derived suppressor Cells (MDSCs) from the bone marrow of pregnant women impacting T-cell responses, Progesterone-Induced Blocking Factor (PIBF), a speculated cargo of EV which is a progesterone hormone induced protein, Multipotent Mesenchymal Stromal Cells (MSCs), etc., strongly suggests the significance of extracellular vesicles role to serve the purpose of immune modulation in pregnancy. The recent study reported that first-trimester placenta-derived exosomes (pEXOs) contribute to regulating maternal immune tolerance by reprogramming the circulating monocytes (Figure ). Exosomal engineering is an upcoming novel paradigm that involves either exogenous or endogenous modifications in the natural exosomes by manipulating their membrane or cargo molecules for precisely targeted therapeutics, which re-emphasizes the therapeutic potential of exosomes in immune modulation during pregnancy complications. Recent progress in this research avenue has given rise to Placental Exosome-Laden Artificial Xenogenic Organelles (PlaXosomes), which imitate intrinsic placental exosomes, thus lowering the secretion of proinflammatory cytokines such as TNF-α and IL-6 while promoting T-regulatory cell expansion and hence reducing the risk of preeclampsia. CRISPR/dCas9-modified exosomes have been engineered for the epigenetic repression of implantation failure-associated genes leading to increased blastocyst adhesion rates by 37% in preclinical models. These advanced approaches highlight the therapeutic precision of exosome-based interventions in pregnancy disorders.

6.

6

Immunomodulatory effect of placenta-derived exosomes on different immune cells. (A) Schematic representation of immunomodulatory effect of placenta-derived exosomes on different immune cells (created with Biorender.com), (B) TEM images, NTA analysis, and western blot exosome markers CD63, HSP70, CD81, and GM130 (Golgi marker) of pEXO, (C) percentage of carboxy-fluorescein succinimidyl ester (CFSE)-labeled pEXO positive cells, (D) flow cytometric analysis interaction of pEXO with CD14+ monocytes, B cells and dendritic cells have a mild interaction with pEXO, while T cells and NK cells have barely any interaction, (E) M2 macrophage markers: CD163, CD206, CD209, IL-10, CCL-2, CCL-8, IDO-1, and HLA-DRA of pEXO-polarized and control macrophages determined by RT-QPCR, (F) flow cytometric analysis showing the increased population of Treg cells (CD4+CD25+Foxp3+) in coculture of autologous T cells and pEXO-educated monocytes, (G) enhanced expression of PD-L1 at the mRNA level in the pEXO-educ monocyte (n = 8), and (H) increased frequencies of CD14+PD-L1+ monocytes from pregnant women and nonpregnant control (Reproduced from ref . Available under a CC-BY 4.0 license. Copyright 2022 The Authors. Published by BioMed Central on behalf of the Journal of Nanobiotechnology.).

8. Exosome-Associated Biomarkers for Pregnancy Complications

In recent years, pregnancy-associated complications like intrauterine growth restriction, placental abruption, preterm and stillbirths, GDM, preeclampsia, etc., have been very evident. The increased spikes in the rates of mortality and morbidity among pregnant women thus significantly affecting the health of mother and child. There are numerous underlying reasons, such as pre-existing conditions like high blood pressure leading to chronic hypertension (AOCGChronic hypertension in pregnancy), autoimmune disorders, age, weight, conditions of multiple gestations (ACOGObstetric Care Consensus), diet, stress, infections and other poor lifestyle choices of the mother, etc. These factors exert a consequential influence on exosome dynamics, attuning both the quantity and bioactive cargo of extracellular vesicles (EVs) secreted into maternal and fetal ecosystems. Multiple studies have illustrated how maternal dietary integrants, specifically high-fat or processed diets, remodel the composition of breast milk exosomes, affecting miRNA profiles that govern immune development, metabolic programming, as well as neural development in infants. , Chronic maternal stress has been shown to effect the release of exosomes through glucocorticoid-mediated modulation of nSMase2 activity, giving rise to modifications in miRNA cargo, with indications for inflammatory responses and fetal vulnerability to asthma and obesity. , Congenital infections due to viral and bacterial exposures have been reported to alter exosome secretion rates and supplement exosomes with pathogen-derived nucleic acids and proteins, potentially leading to neonatal immune priming and escalating risk for long-term metabolic and inflammatory diseases. Furthermore, maternal habitat is also a key factor for fetal development as studies have revealed that environmental pollutants and associated oxidative stress can trigger exosomal release possessing stress-responsive miRNAs and proteins, further aiding to fetal programming of chronic diseases. In conclusion, all of these findings emphasize that maternal diet, psychological stress, and infections are not just transient conditions but critical modulators of exosomal signaling pathways that may imprint lifelong health trajectories in the offspring. The epigenetic and immunomodulatory effects mediated through exosome alterations highlight the need for tailored maternal care strategies during pregnancy and lactation. ,

During normal pregnancy, the rate of exosomal secretion increases drastically, peaking in the third trimester, which suggests maximal placental activity and fetomaternal communication. In preeclampsia (PE), exosome concentrations are significantly elevated as early as the second trimester, with modifications in cargo containing increased antiangiogenic factors like sFlt-1 and inflammatory mediators like TNF-α and IL-6. , The exosomal proteome in PE is enriched with proteins that play crucial roles in oxidative stress and endothelial dysfunction, diverging from the principal antioxidant and vascular regulatory proteins in normal pregnancies. Exosomes carrying altered adipokines and glucose transport regulators, like downregulated GLUT4 and increased resistin, are observed in GDM, correlating with maternal insulin resistance. At the miRNA level, PE-exosomes show increased miR-210 and miR-136, resulting in dysregulated angiogenesis and trophoblast invasion, whereas GDM exosomes display elevated miR-29a and miR-330-3p, both linked to β-cell dysfunction. , Comparative studies show the shift in exosomal lipid compositions from phosphatidylserine-rich profiles in normal pregnancies to ceramide-enriched patterns in PE, denoting remodeled pathways of vesicle biogenesis. Placental extracellular vesicles from severe PE patients dysregulate cardiomyocyte calcium balance in vitro, indicting systemic off-target effects. Furthermore, endometrial EV secretion rates and cargo are hormonally regulated in early gestation, and aberrations therein are associated with early onset PE and GDM. ,

Exosomes have been emerging as remarkable biomarkers for the noninvasive diagnosis of pregnancy complications. Based on the specific types of cells/tissue that secrete them and the cargo molecules present, they are considered unique biomarkers in liquid biopsy assessment for early disease diagnosis and prophylaxis concerning disorders like preeclampsia and GDM discussed in Table . Isolation of exosomes from clinical samples is a crucial component in extrapolating their efficacy for diagnostic, therapeutic, and basic biomedical research. A vertical of exosome research is devoted to improving the existing techniques by consolidating modern hybrid methods to optimize purity, yield, and efficacy. Conventional approaches such as ultracentrifugation (UC), size-exclusion chromatography (SEC), and immuno-affinity capture (IAC) have been extensively used, yet each method has its limitations. By examining recent research holistically, we can appreciate how these techniques complement each other rather than exist as isolated methodologies.

2. Comprehensive List of Potential Biomarkers for Early Diagnosis of Preeclampsia and Gestational Diabetes Mellitus.

sr. no biomarker for preeclampsia nature source isolation/detection/quantification methods function/potential role references
  For Preeclampsia          
1. Placental Growth Factor (PlGF) Pro-angiogenic Serum ELISA Promotes blood vessel formation in the placenta
2. Soluble Fms-like Tyrosine Kinase-1 (sFlt-1) Antiangiogenic Whole blood ExoQuick (System Bioscience, Inc., SBI, Mountain View) precipitation method Inhibits the activity of PlGF and VEGF, leading to endothelial dysfunction
3. Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) Pro-angiogenic Serum ELISA Stimulates the formation of blood vessels, essential for placental development
4. Endoglin (sEng) Co-receptor Whole blood ExoQuick (System Bioscience, Inc., SBI, Mountain View) precipitation method Modulates angiogenesis and is involved in vascular development
5. C19 MC micro RNAs (miRNAs) Genetic material Plasma & Placental tissue mirVana microRNA Isolation kit & Trizol method Regulate gene expression, potentially impacting placental development and function
6. Cell-free DNA (CfDNA) Genetic material Plasma ExoQuick exosome precipitation, ExoLution Plus extraction and differential centrifugation Reflects placental health and can indicate placental dysfunction
7. A Disintegrin and Metalloprotease-12 (ADAM12) Metalloprotease Placenta Mass spectrometry Involved in placental invasion
8. Pregnancy-Associated Plasma Protein A (PAPP-A) Glycoprotein Serum ELISA Altered levels predict PE
9. Interleukin – 6 (IL-6) Cytokine Blood ELISA Elevated in PE-related inflammation
10. Tumor Necrosis Factors (TNF-α) Inflammatory cytokine Blood ELISA Elevated in PE due to inflammation
11. Heat Shock Protein −70 (HSP70) Heat shock protein Maternal blood Western blot Elevated in cellular stress
12. Transthyretin (TTR) Exosome protein Placenta Proteomics/ITRAQ mass spectrometry Alters placental function
13. IL-1β, IL-18 Inflammasome proteins Placental cells ELISA Part of inflammatory cascade  
14. Soluble Leukemia Inhibitory Factor Receptor (sLIFR) Glycoprotein Placenta Proteomics Linked to implantation processes
15. Angiopoietin-2 (ANG-2) Angiogenic protein Maternal serum ELISA Blood vessel formation
16. Hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) Growth factor Maternal blood Protein multiplex Promotes vascular growth
17. SM C28:1, SM C30:1 Metabolites Serum Metabolomics Predictive metabolites
18. Exosome Surface Protein CD63 For GDM Exosome surface protein Placental exosomes Flow cytometry Reflects cell origin/Increased in PE exosomes  
  FOR GDM          
19. miR-29a/b Genetic material Venous blood/serum Trizol Total RNA Isolation Decreased expression; potential for prognosis evaluation
20. miR-21 Genetic material Placental samples Trizol method for extraction & TaqMan MicroRNA Reverse Transcription Kit for quantification Down-regulated; inhibits cell proliferation and infiltration by inducing PPAR-α
21. miR-195-5p Genetic material Serum samples TRIzol LS reagent (Life Technologies) Upregulated; associated with GDM
22. miR-875-5p Genetic material blood serum TRIzol reagent (Invitrogen; Thermo Fisher Scientific) Regulates insulin resistance and inflammation via targeting TXNRD1
23. miR-330-3p Genetic material Peripheral blood samples/Plasma MiRNeasy miRNA extraction kit (Qiagen) Upregulated in plasma of GDM patients
24. miR-132 Genetic material Blood and placental tissue samples TRIzol reagent (Invitrogen) Diagnostic biomarker; regulates trophoblast cell viability
25. miR-140 Genetic material Placental tissues and peripheral blood plasma TRIzol reagent method (Invitrogen) & Quantitative RT-PCR Dysregulated; related to defective insulin receptor signaling
26. miR-574-5p Genetic material Plasma samples miRNeasy Serum/Plasma kit (Qaigen) Potential metabolic regulator for serum lipids and blood glucose
27. miR-181d Genetic material Serum samples TRIzol reagent (Thermo Fisher Scientific, USA) Promotes pancreatic β cell dysfunction by targeting IRS2
28. miR-16, -29a, -134 Genetic material Blood/serum samples TRIReagent LS (Sigma-Aldrich) & Nanodrop quantification Early identification markers for GDM
29. Hs-CRP and SHBG Proteins Venous blood samples ELISA quantification Hs-CRPupregulated; SHBGdownregulated among patients who developed GDM
30. hsa_circRNA_0039480 Genetic material Peripheral blood samples Microarray & Western blot Highly expressed in GDM; may serve as a biomarker for early diagnosis of GDM
31. Adiponectin Glycoprotein Serum ELISA Decreased in GDM
32. Sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) Hormone-binding protein Blood serum Immunoassay Lower levels predict GDM
33. Insulin Peptide hormone Maternal blood ELISA Elevated levels in GDM
34. sCD163 Soluble glycoprotein Macrophages ELISA Immune response modulation
35. Uterine artery pulsatility index (UtA-PI) Doppler ultrasound measurement Uterine arteries Doppler ultrasound Blood flow assessment
36. Body Mass Index (BMI) Predictor Baseline measurement Statistical modeling High BMI linked to GDM risk
37. HSP27, HSP60 Heat shock proteins Placenta Western blot Elevated in GDM-related stress
38. IL-6, CRP Inflammatory markers Maternal serum ELISA Elevated due to GDM
39. Visfatin Adipokine Maternal blood ELISA Metabolic regulation
40. FGF21 Adipokine Maternal blood ELISA Regulates metabolism
41. Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) Glycoprotein marker Blood ELISA Higher levels indicate GDM
42. Oral Glucose Tolerance Test (OGTT) Glycemic; Glucose tolerance indicator Blood sample Plasma glucose measured at intervals after glucose ingestion Gold standard for diagnosing GDM, assessing glucose metabolism under stress
43. Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) Glycemic; Glucose indicator Blood sample Enzymatic colorimetric assays, point-of-care glucose meters Elevated FPG indicates impaired glucose tolerance; used as a key diagnostic criterion for GDM
44. Leptin Hormonal; Cytokine-like protein Adipose tissue ELISA, radioimmunoassay High levels are related to increased insulin resistance and metabolic imbalance in GDM
45. Exosomal Glypican-1 (GPC1) Cell surface glycoprotein; Exosome marker Plasma exosomes Western blot, flow cytometry Linked with insulin sensitivity and β-cell function, with elevated levels in GDM
46. Fetuin-A Glycoprotein; Exosome-associated protein Blood, plasma exosomes ELISA, Immunoblotting Higher levels are associated with insulin resistance and inflammation, contributing to GDM progression
47. Adipocyte Fatty Acid-Binding Protein (AFABP) Lipid-binding protein; Adipokine Blood, exosomes ELISA, mass spectrometry Higher levels correlate with increased lipolysis and metabolic dysregulation in GDM
48. Resistin Inflammatory protein; Exosome-associated Adipose tissue, plasma exosomes ELISA, Immunoblotting Elevated levels in GDM; promotes insulin resistance and inflammation
49 Endoglin (CD105) Glycoprotein; Involved in angiogenesis Placenta, plasma exosomes ELISA, flow cytometry Dysregulated in GDM, contributing to endothelial dysfunction and vascular changes in the placenta
50. Omentin-1 Adipokine; Exosome-associated protein Blood plasma, adipose tissue ELISA Reduced levels are associated with insulin resistance and inflammation in GDM
51. Plasminogen Activator Inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) Fibrinolytic system protein; Serine protease inhibitor Plasma ELISA, immunoassays Elevated in GDM, linked to hypercoagulability and endothelial dysfunction
52. Lipocalin-2 (LCN2) Iron-binding protein; Secreted adipokine Plasma, placenta ELISA, Immunoblotting Elevated in GDM, linked to inflammation, iron metabolism, and insulin resistance
53. Endothelin-1 (ET-1) Vasoconstrictor peptide; Endothelial-derived Blood vessels, plasma ELISA, immunohistochemistry Increased in GDM, contributes to vascular dysfunction and hypertension
54. Asprosin Glucogenic protein; Circulating hormone Plasma ELISA, mass spectrometry Elevated in GDM, involved in hepatic glucose release and insulin resistance
55. Oxidized LDL (ox-LDL) Lipoprotein; Oxidative stress marker Blood plasma ELISA, lipid peroxidation assays Higher levels are linked to oxidative stress and endothelial dysfunction in GDM

8.1. Ultracentrifugation vs Size-Exclusion Chromatography

Due to the uncomplicated protocol and ease of processing large volumes, Ultracentrifugation (UC) has been considered as the benchmark for exosomes. However, the method is restricted by its coisolation of protein aggregates and extracellular vesicles of similar density. UC, when combined with polymer precipitation, significantly enhances the yield but at the cost of purity, as protein contaminants are often retained as described by Shami-Shah et al. 2023. To tackle this issue, size-exclusion chromatography (SEC) has been proposed as an alternative, as it aids in exosome separation depending on its molecular size while preserving its structural integrity. Mitchell et al. 2022 compared SEC to UC and revealed that while SEC offers remarkable purity, it is limited by its incapacity to process high sample volumes efficiently, making it more suitable for research than clinical-scale applications. These findings suggest that combining UC and SEC (where UC is used for bulk separation and SEC for refinement) could create a hybrid approach that maximizes both yield and purity.

8.2. Immuno-Affinity Capture

Immuno-affinity-based capture (IAC) methods have been engineered to improve specificity by targeting surface markers of exosomes, viz., CD9, CD63, and CD81. As demonstrated by Gorgzadeh et al. 2024, IAC offers superior specificity in extracting tumor-derived exosomes, which is a crucial aspect of biomarker discovery. The main drawback of this technique is its high dependency on the attainability of specific antibodies and is cost-prohibitive for large-scale applications. Zhou et al. 2024 addressed these challenges by incorporating SEC with IAC, thus extrapolating the SEC’s ability to dislodge protein contaminants before applying antibody-based capture, thereby increasing both purity and specificity. This suggests that although IAC is a powerful tool for highly specific applications, it benefits from preprocessing steps that remove bulk contaminants.

8.3. Microfluidic-Based Isolation

The time-consuming nature and low throughput are the major limitations of traditional methods. To tackle these parameters, an electro-kinetically empowered microfluidic dependent for exosome isolation technique was reported by. This approach enables rapid, label-free, and high-purity separations, making it specifically suitable for point-of-care (POC) diagnostics. Similarly, Yaman et al. 2025 have come up with EV-Lev tech, which is a microfluidic magnetic levitation device that not only enhances selectivity but also enables high-throughput processing, which was lacking in traditional methods. Although microfluidic platforms in exosome research are emerging as robust tools, they still face challenges in terms of standardization and scalability. To bridge this gap, Chernyshev et al. 2023 proposed a bead-assisted microfluidic isolation system, integrating IAC with microfluidic processing to enhance both specificity and throughput. The convergence of microfluidics with established isolation techniques signals a shift toward automated, high-efficiency protocols that possess the potential to redefine exosome isolation especially in bed-side and clinical settings.

Furthermore from a diagnostic perspective, Prostatic Acid Phosphatase (PLAP)- ELISA kits are readily accessible for characterizing placental EVs and achieves 92% sensitivity and 88% specificity for preeclampsia detection, significantly outperforming traditional ELISA, which reports 75% sensitivity and lower specificity due to nonexosomal protein background noise. An immunocapture technique has also been reported for enriching PLAP-positive EVs from maternal circulation and the direct enrichment of PLAP + EVs from blood using gold-loaded nanoporous nanocubes. A hybrid approach of Immunocapture-based microfluidic platforms targeting placental exosome markers (CD63, CD81) exhibits 95% specificity for gestational diabetes detection, drastically reducing false positives compared to conventional immunoassays (80%). A recent study by Mitchell and co-researchers developed the ultrasensitive immuno-purification assay, termed EV-CATCHER, with a monoclonal antibody targeting the membrane PLAP protein.

Preeclampsia affects almost 10 million females worldwide, indicating the extent of pregnancy risks. It is one of the intricate pregnancy disorders, typically attributed as a disease associated with chronic hypertension, with a distinction in its onset and nature. It comprises a complex multisystem syndrome with a notable difference in its pathological and pathophysiological aspects in contrast to chronic hypertension. The typical symptoms include a high blood pressure reading of 140/90 mm of Hg twice in a 4-h gap, proteinuria, thrombocytopenia, headache, temporary loss/alteration of vision, pulmonary edema, stroke, nausea/vomiting, etc. Primarily, pregnant women who are suspected of preeclampsia are subjected to hematourological tests to detect symptoms as discussed above, and the cases are clinically confirmed by Doppler assessment. However, at times, some women might have the possibility of ambiguous diagnosis due to nonspecific abnormalities.

At this juncture, biomarkers are crucial in enhancing diagnostic accuracy and getting confirmation. The burden of GDM is also no less than close to 1 million hyperglycemia-associated cases in pregnant women. In some lower-middle-income countries in Africa and Asia, epidemiological investigations reveal that the prevalence of GDM ranges from 1–30% and has become a pervasive pregnancy-associated disorder alongside Preeclampsia globally. GDM is fundamentally a metabolism-associated disease that is clinically diagnosed at around the fifth–sixth month of pregnancy, and the hyperglycemic condition further elevates the case complexity, leading to obvious symptoms like heart-related abnormalities, obesity and even becoming a cocause for Preeclampsia, thus affecting the mother and developing fetus by the time diagnosis is confirmed. Early prognosis of the disease in such cases is made possible by clinically investigating the exosome biomarker properties. The latest literature has further validated the impact of exosomal miRNAs (Exo-miRNA) as prime indicators for pregnancy complications (Figure ). Fóthi et al., 2024 identified specific miRNA signatures in maternal blood during the first trimester, which could prognosticate gestational diabetes and preeclampsia. In a study, it was shown that placental exosomal miR-520a-5p levels were drastically elevated in severe preeclampsia and intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR), and proteomic profiling of maternal exosomes identified 855 differentially expressed proteins, distinguishing normal from high-risk pregnancies. This data accredits the feasibility of exosomal biomarkers for early first-trimester detection of pregnancy complications. Another instance in Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS), an autoimmune disorder associated with pregnancies, shows distinct exosomal miR-499 expression, impacting NF-κB pathway activity. All of these new revelations extensively suggest that exosome profiling could serve as a benchmark for preemptive diagnosis of high-risk pregnancies. Although the importance of exosome research as potential biomarkers in clinical diagnosis is rapidly evolving, they are still under extensive lookout. Further research is highly desired to decipher and understand the complex cargo at different stages of pregnancy and its underlying mechanisms to get a clear picture of pregnancy-associated disorders.

7.

7

Schematic representation of workflow placental exosome isolation with different available conventional as well as modern methods and biomarker detection (created with Biorender.com).

Clinical validation of exosomal biomarkers in well-designed large cohort studies has been increasingly relevant for the development of noninvasive, early diagnostic tools for these diseases. New studies have emphasized the reliability of exosomal microRNAs (miRNAs), proteins, and lipidomic signatures in prognosing such conditions, thus strengthening their translational potential. To authenticate the clinical relevance of exosome, a large-scale retrospective case-control study was done by Hromadnikova et al. 2019 consisting of 4356 singleton pregnancies in the Caucasian population. Maternal plasma samples were collected between 10–13 weeks of gestation, and exosomes were isolated to conduct an extensive analysis of the C19MC microRNA cluster, which showed considerable differential expression patterns in women who later developed gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, or fetal growth restriction. The study reported that miR-517-5p, miR-518b, and miR-520h were downregulated, with predictive performance showing sensitivities ranging from 82 to 88% and specificities between 80 and 85%, positioning these miRNAs as reliable first-trimester biomarkers. Another retrospective nested case-control study in a cohort of 3,600 women undergoing first-trimester integrated screening by employing fetal nuchal translucency ultrasound, serum PAPP-A, and β-HCG measurements between 11–13+6 weeks of gestation as conducted by Xu et al. 2024. Placental exosomal miR-520a-5p levels were measured using qRT-PCR, revealing a statistically appreciable rise in women who, in due course, developed severe preeclampsia and IUGR. The predictive efficacy, assessed through ROC analysis, illustrated an AUC of 0.806 (p < 0.001), emphasizing its potential in early clinical screening models. In a distinct spectrum of complications was investigated by Sun et al. 2020 for exosomal miRNAs as clinical hits for ectopic pregnancy through a prospective validation study of 36 women presenting with early pregnancy symptoms. Differential expression analysis recognized exosomal miR-378d, miR-100-5p, and miR-215-5p to be significantly upregulated in ectopic pregnancy cases. A panel for a collective of hCG, progesterone, and the identified miRNAs showed a remarkable specificity of 80% at a sensitivity of 91%, thus demonstrating promising diagnostic application in acute care settings. All these multicohort validations emphasize that exosome-based biomarkers hold great promise for early, noninvasive detection of pregnancy complications as predictive clinical models.

9. Challenges and Future Perspectives

With significant research being conducted on exosome applications, it is critical to understand the progress made and the ongoing challenges. Although EV analysis has advanced significantly in recent decades, the exact mechanisms of biogenesis remain unknown. Exosomes in maternal circulation come from a variety of tissues, including the placenta, immune cells, and endothelium. Distinguishing between these sources is difficult but necessary as placenta-derived exosomes are more predictive of pregnancy status. Current methodologies lack the precision to accurately trace exosome origins, complicating the interpretation of biomarker data. Researchers face numerous challenges in understanding the exact mechanisms of exosomes in pregnancy complications. The main challenge is using an experimental approach to understand the processes that occur within the human body. Another issue is related to the separation of placental exosomes from maternal circulation. Purified exosome isolation requires a well-established, standard workflow. Exosome production and extraction on a large scale with a high purity are still essential. It is crucial to develop an affordable technology for clinical use. Further research is also required on delivery techniques (e.g., oral, intravenous, and intraperitoneal), and repeated exosome administration’s long-term safety (toxicity, immunogenicity) has to be examined. Creating reliable diagnostic tools with placental exosomes requires the standardization of isolation and analysis techniques. Exosomes have attracted attention as possible guides for identifying and forecasting infertility issues as theory is essential for controlling the process of embryo implantation. Placental exosomes may act as disease-predictive indicators as a result of this early discovery, allowing medical professionals to create prompt treatment plans. The ability of placental exosomes to be isolated from mother blood offers a non-invasive way to track placental health, which is advantageous when employing them. However, with a number of encouraging studies, this discipline is still in its infancy; therefore, further research is still required to establish the reliability and specificity of placental exosomes as predictive markers. The potential of exosomal mRNA, miRNAs, and nucleic acid sequences as possibilities for forecasting the start of illness has been emphasized by ongoing investigations. Nevertheless, further research and validation are required to convert these candidates into trustworthy biomarkers for determining the likelihood of developing pregnancy-related problems.

Furthermore, the prognosis and progression of PE are correlated with different levels of exomiR expression. The investigation of EVs in GDM has the potential to improve our comprehension of the disease’s causes and provide diagnostic instruments. Even with this advancement, there are still major obstacles in the way of EVs being clinical diagnostic tools rather than just research discoveries. Numerous EV sources, including urine, plasma, cultured explant medium, and different methods for EV separation and characterization, have been employed in the studies. Additionally, research has investigated the relationship between EV alterations and clinical factors, frequently focusing on small cohorts and particular groups. EVs may have lasting impacts that contribute to long-term issues. Without large-scale replication trials to establish clinical effectiveness and extrapolate the potential, most research has now included a small cohortset. To help manage this problematic illness, international research teams devoted to exosomes should prioritize this field of study. Exosomes are safer as biological products because of their ability to avoid being phagocytosed or destroyed by macrophages because of their tiny size and biological activity. However, because of their uncertain nature and activity, it is still difficult to anticipate the long-term safety and therapeutic impact of these biomarkers.

Despite studies revealing that free β-human chorionic gonadotropin (f-hCG) is unsuitable for PE prediction due to consistent findings across 10 studies showing no significant difference in f-hCG levels between PE cases and controls, other markers like ADAM12 and activin A remain inconclusive with contradictory or limited data. This necessitates further studies to ascertain their potential role in PE screening. Conversely, significantly reduced concentrations of placental protein 13 (PP13), placental growth factor (PlGF), and pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A) in the first trimester, along with increased levels of inhibin A, have been strongly linked to the onset of PE. Nonetheless, none of these serum markers appear promising due to only modest detection rates (DRs) at a false positive rate (FPR) of 10%. Thus, single marker screening is deemed unsuitable for clinical practice, and combining the best-performing serum markers with maternal constitutional characteristics and/or uterine artery (Ut-A) Doppler assessments yields higher DRs, making them more promising. This approach is especially relevant for early-onset PE, which is linked to numerous maternal and fetal complications. Large prospective studies are needed to confirm these associations and validate the potential utility of marker combinations in various populations. Exploration into other markers, such as nucleic acids, proteins, peptides, and cellular metabolites, is ongoing. Unlike Doppler ultrasound, which relies on operator skill and standardized measurement techniques, exosomal biomarkers can offer more consistent and reproducible results and real-time insights into cellular processes and pathophysiological changes occurring in the placenta. By integrating exosomal biomarkers with traditional screening methods, it is possible to overcome limitations associated with Doppler ultrasound, potentially enhancing early detection of pregnancy-associated risks and improving maternal and fetal outcomes.

10. Conclusions

Maternal mortality and pregnancy-related complications present significant global health challenges, severely impacting the health of both mother and baby. These complications are exacerbated by maternal illnesses, with key causes and modifiable risk factors including infections, hypertension, congenital malformations, fetal growth restriction, and prematurity. Therefore, enhancing maternal care is crucial to minimizing these risks. Improving fetal outcomes requires the early identification of potential risk factors and the implementation of effective perinatal management strategies, particularly focusing on the early detection of fetal growth restriction. Currently, diagnoses for these conditions rely on conventional screening or diagnostic methods, and there is a shortage of biomarkers with an early predictive value. The development of noninvasive diagnostic techniques has highlighted the potential of exosomes in the peripheral blood of pregnant women as biomarkers for pregnancy-related diseases. Exosomes, which are instrumental in maternal–fetal interaction during gestation, reflect the microenvironment and metabolic state of their cell of origin, providing insights into these cells’ function and metabolic status. Studies have indicated that the placenta secretes exosomes into the maternal bloodstream, which plays a crucial role in modulating immune responses during pregnancy and maintaining maternal vascular health. Gaining more insight into how exosomes influence important pregnancy processes could shed light on the mechanisms of communication between the mother and fetus under both healthy and abnormal pregnancy conditions. As the field of EVs continues to grow, better characterization of placental exosomes released under various physiological and pathological conditions will be crucial. Understanding the mechanisms of placental exosome transfer between cells could lead to the development of new diagnostic tools and treatments. With rapid advancements in medical science and technology, collecting comprehensive data throughout pregnancy and various types of samples will aid in the development of predictive models for pregnancy complications and abnormal fetal development. Comprehensive analysis using advanced techniques is vital for answering unresolved questions, testing hypotheses, and exploring potential treatment options for pregnancy disorders. Enhanced analytical methods are needed to address open questions, pursue intriguing hypotheses, and explore potential therapeutic avenues for pregnancy pathologies.

Acknowledgments

K.A. acknowledges the University of the Free State (UFS) and the National Research Foundation (NRF), South Africa for the NRF-Incentive Funding for Rated Researchers [Grant Number: 132377] and NRF Funding for Y-rated Researchers [Grant Number: CSRP22031632]

S.B.: Writingreview and editing, and validation, R.H.: writingreview and editing, K.B.: writingreview and editing, and validation, N.D.: writingreview and editing, N.V.: writingreview and editing, M.D.: review and editing, N.M.: investigation and review, and K.A.: conceptualization, investigation, review, validation, and funding acquisition.

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Published as part of ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering special issue “Extracellular Vesicles as Delivery Vehicles”.

References

  1. Soma-Pillay P., Nelson-Piercy C., Tolppanen H., Mebazaa A.. Physiological Changes in Pregnancy. Cardiovasc. J. Afr. 2016;27(2):89–94. doi: 10.5830/CVJA-2016-021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Saadaoui M., Kumar M., Al Khodor S.. COVID-19 Infection during Pregnancy: Risk of Vertical Transmission, Fetal, and Neonatal Outcomes. J. Pers. Med. 2021;11(6):483. doi: 10.3390/jpm11060483. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Greenberg G. C., Vishwakarma N., Tirupattur M. P., Sprague H. M., Katwa L. C.. Implications of COVID-19 Pandemic on Pregnancy: Current Status and Controversies. COVID. 2023;3(6):859–873. doi: 10.3390/covid3060062. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  4. Andrews G., Henderson S., Hall W.. Prevalence, Comorbidity, Disability and Service Utilisation. Br. J. Psychiatry. 2001;178(2):145–153. doi: 10.1192/bjp.178.2.145. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Ross E. J., Graham D. L., Money K. M., Stanwood G. D.. Developmental Consequences of Fetal Exposure to Drugs: What We Know and What We Still Must Learn. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2015;40(1):61–87. doi: 10.1038/npp.2014.147. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Chersich M. F., Pham M. D., Areal A., Haghighi M. M., Manyuchi A., Swift C. P., Wernecke B., Robinson M., Hetem R., Boeckmann M., Hajat S.. Associations between High Temperatures in Pregnancy and Risk of Preterm Birth, Low Birth Weight, and Stillbirths: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. BMJ. 2020:m3811. doi: 10.1136/bmj.m3811. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Yüzen D., Graf I., Diemert A., Arck P. C.. Climate Change and Pregnancy Complications: From Hormones to the Immune Response. Front. Endocrinol. 2023;14:1149284. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1149284. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Zhang H., Zhang X., Wang Q., Xu Y., Feng Y., Yu Z., Huang C.. Ambient Air Pollution and Stillbirth: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Epidemiological Studies. Environ. Pollut. 2021;278:116752. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2021.116752. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Roncancio C. P., Misnaza S. P., Peña I. C., Prieto F. E., Cannon M. J., Valencia D.. Trends and Characteristics of Fetal and Neonatal Mortality Due to Congenital Anomalies, Colombia 1999–2008. JJ. Matern.-Fetal Neonat. Med. 2018;31(13):1748–1755. doi: 10.1080/14767058.2017.1326901. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Chen T., Liu D.. The Mystery of Exosomes in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. Oxid. Med. Cell. Longevity. 2022;2022:1–11. doi: 10.1155/2022/2169259. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Magee L. A., Brown M. A., Hall D. R., Gupte S., Hennessy A., Karumanchi S. A., Kenny L. C., McCarthy F., Myers J., Poon L. C., Rana S., Saito S., Staff A. C., Tsigas E., von Dadelszen P.. The 2021 International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy Classification, Diagnosis & Management Recommendations for International Practice. Pregnancy Hypertens. 2022;27:148–169. doi: 10.1016/j.preghy.2021.09.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Nelson K. M., Irvin-Choy N., Hoffman M. K., Gleghorn J. P., Day E. S.. Diseases and Conditions That Impact Maternal and Fetal Health and the Potential for Nanomedicine Therapies. Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2021;170:425–438. doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2020.09.013. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Tannetta D., Masliukaite I., Vatish M., Redman C., Sargent I.. Update of Syncytiotrophoblast Derived Extracellular Vesicles in Normal Pregnancy and Preeclampsia. J. Reprod. Immunol. 2017;119:98–106. doi: 10.1016/j.jri.2016.08.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Redman C. W. G., Sargent I. L.. Placental Debris, Oxidative Stress and Pre-Eclampsia. Placenta. 2000;21(7):597–602. doi: 10.1053/plac.2000.0560. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Huotari J., Helenius A.. Endosome Maturation. EMBO J. 2011;30(17):3481–3500. doi: 10.1038/emboj.2011.286. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Kowal J., Tkach M., Théry C.. Biogenesis and Secretion of Exosomes. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2014;29:116–125. doi: 10.1016/j.ceb.2014.05.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Minciacchi V. R., Freeman M. R., Di Vizio D.. Extracellular Vesicles in Cancer: Exosomes, Microvesicles and the Emerging Role of Large Oncosomes. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 2015;40:41–51. doi: 10.1016/j.semcdb.2015.02.010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Record M.. Intercellular Communication by Exosomes in Placenta: A Possible Role in Cell Fusion? Placenta. 2014;35(5):297–302. doi: 10.1016/j.placenta.2014.02.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Baietti M. F., Zhang Z., Mortier E., Melchior A., Degeest G., Geeraerts A., Ivarsson Y., Depoortere F., Coomans C., Vermeiren E., Zimmermann P., David G.. Syndecan–Syntenin–ALIX Regulates the Biogenesis of Exosomes. Nat. Cell Biol. 2012;14(7):677–685. doi: 10.1038/ncb2502. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Lee Y. J., Shin K. J., Chae Y. C.. Regulation of Cargo Selection in Exosome Biogenesis and Its Biomedical Applications in Cancer. Exp. Mol. Med. 2024;56(4):877–889. doi: 10.1038/s12276-024-01209-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Hurley J. H.. ESCRT s Are Everywhere. EMBO J. 2015;34(19):2398–2407. doi: 10.15252/embj.201592484. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Stuffers S., Sem Wegner C., Stenmark H., Brech A.. Multivesicular Endosome Biogenesis in the Absence of ESCRTs. Traffic. 2009;10(7):925–937. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0854.2009.00920.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Trajkovic K., Hsu C., Chiantia S., Rajendran L., Wenzel D., Wieland F., Schwille P., Brügger B., Simons M.. Ceramide Triggers Budding of Exosome Vesicles into Multivesicular Endosomes. Science. 2008;319(5867):1244–1247. doi: 10.1126/science.1153124. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Wei D., Zhan W., Gao Y., Huang L., Gong R., Wang W., Zhang R., Wu Y., Gao S., Kang T.. RAB31 Marks and Controls an ESCRT-Independent Exosome Pathway. Cell Res. 2021;31(2):157–177. doi: 10.1038/s41422-020-00409-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Vlassov A. V., Magdaleno S., Setterquist R., Conrad R.. Exosomes: Current Knowledge of Their Composition, Biological Functions, and Diagnostic and Therapeutic Potentials. Biochim. Biophys. Acta, Gen. Subj. 2012;1820(7):940–948. doi: 10.1016/j.bbagen.2012.03.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Malla R., Marni R., Chakraborty A.. Exploring the Role of CD151 in the Tumor Immune Microenvironment: Therapeutic and Clinical Perspectives. Biochim. Biophys. Acta, Rev. Cancer. 2023;1878(3):188898. doi: 10.1016/j.bbcan.2023.188898. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Jankovicova J., Frolikova M., Palenikova V., Valaskova E., Cerny J., Secova P., Bartokova M., Horovska L., Manaskova-Postlerova P., Antalikova J., Komrskova K.. Expression and Distribution of CD151 as a Partner of Alpha6 Integrin in Male Germ Cells. Sci. Rep. 2020;10(1):4374. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-61334-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Zhang J., Li H., Fan B., Xu W., Zhang X.. Extracellular Vesicles in Normal Pregnancy and Pregnancy-related Diseases. J. Cell Mol. Med. 2020;24(8):4377–4388. doi: 10.1111/jcmm.15144. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Ratajczak J., Wysoczynski M., Hayek F., Janowska-Wieczorek A., Ratajczak M. Z.. Membrane-Derived Microvesicles: Important and Underappreciated Mediators of Cell-to-Cell Communication. Leukemia. 2006;20(9):1487–1495. doi: 10.1038/sj.leu.2404296. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Nguyen C. M., Sallam M., Islam M. S., Clack K., Soda N., Nguyen N.-T., Shiddiky M. J. A.. Placental Exosomes as Biomarkers for Maternal Diseases: Current Advances in Isolation, Characterization, and Detection. ACS Sens. 2023;8(7):2493–2513. doi: 10.1021/acssensors.3c00689. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Lässer C., Seyed Alikhani V., Ekström K., Eldh M., Torregrosa Paredes P., Bossios A., Sjöstrand M., Gabrielsson S., Lötvall J., Valadi H.. Human Saliva, Plasma and Breast Milk Exosomes Contain RNA: Uptake by Macrophages. J. Transl. Med. 2011;9(1):9. doi: 10.1186/1479-5876-9-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Mitchell M. D., Peiris H. N., Kobayashi M., Koh Y. Q., Duncombe G., Illanes S. E., Rice G. E., Salomon C.. Placental Exosomes in Normal and Complicated Pregnancy. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2015;213(4):S173–S181. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2015.07.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Burkova E. E., Sedykh S. E., Nevinsky G. A.. Human Placenta Exosomes: Biogenesis, Isolation, Composition, and Prospects for Use in Diagnostics. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021;22(4):2158. doi: 10.3390/ijms22042158. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Sarker S., Scholz-Romero K., Perez A., Illanes S. E., Mitchell M. D., Rice G. E., Salomon C.. Placenta-Derived Exosomes Continuously Increase in Maternal Circulation over the First Trimester of Pregnancy. J. Transl. Med. 2014;12(1):204. doi: 10.1186/1479-5876-12-204. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Cook J., Bennett P. R., Kim S. H., Teoh T. G., Sykes L., Kindinger L. M., Garrett A., Binkhamis R., MacIntyre D. A., Terzidou V.. First Trimester Circulating MicroRNA Biomarkers Predictive of Subsequent Preterm Delivery and Cervical Shortening. Sci. Rep. 2019;9(1):5861. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-42166-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Ghafourian M., Mahdavi R., Akbari Jonoush Z., Sadeghi M., Ghadiri N., Farzaneh M., Mousavi Salehi A.. The Implications of Exosomes in Pregnancy: Emerging as New Diagnostic Markers and Therapeutics Targets. Cell Commun. Signaling. 2022;20(1):51. doi: 10.1186/s12964-022-00853-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Farrelly R., Kennedy M. G., Spencer R., Forbes K.. Extracellular Vesicles as Markers and Mediators of Pregnancy Complications: Gestational Diabetes, Pre-eclampsia, Preterm Birth and Fetal Growth Restriction. J. Physiol. 2023;601(22):4973–4988. doi: 10.1113/JP282849. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Czernek L., Düchler M.. Exosomes as Messengers between Mother and Fetus in Pregnancy. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020;21(12):4264. doi: 10.3390/ijms21124264. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Bai K., Li X., Zhong J., Ng E. H. Y., Yeung W. S. B., Lee C.-L., Chiu P. C. N.. Placenta-Derived Exosomes as a Modulator in Maternal Immune Tolerance During Pregnancy. Front. Immunol. 2021;12:671093. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.671093. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Tong M., Chen Q., James J. L., Wise M. R., Stone P. R., Chamley L. W.. In Vivo Targets of Human Placental Micro-Vesicles Vary with Exposure Time and Pregnancy. Reproduction. 2017;153(6):835–845. doi: 10.1530/REP-16-0615. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Sheller-Miller S., Lei J., Saade G., Salomon C., Burd I., Menon R.. Feto-Maternal Trafficking of Exosomes in Murine Pregnancy Models. Front. Pharmacol. 2016;7:432. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2016.00432. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Willms E., Johansson H. J., Mäger I., Lee Y., Blomberg K. E. M., Sadik M., Alaarg A., Smith C. I. E., Lehtiö J., EL Andaloussi S., Wood M. J. A., Vader P.. Cells Release Subpopulations of Exosomes with Distinct Molecular and Biological Properties. Sci. Rep. 2016;6(1):22519. doi: 10.1038/srep22519. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Han C., Wang C., Chen Y., Wang J., Xu X., Hilton T., Cai W., Zhao Z., Wu Y., Li K., Houck K., Liu L., Sood A. K., Wu X., Xue F., Li M., Dong J., Zhang J.. Placenta-Derived Extracellular Vesicles Induce Preeclampsia in Mouse Models. Haematologica. 2020;105(6):1686–1694. doi: 10.3324/haematol.2019.226209. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Kshirsagar S. K., Alam S. M., Jasti S., Hodes H., Nauser T., Gilliam M., Billstrand C., Hunt J. S., Petroff M. G.. Immunomodulatory Molecules Are Released from the First Trimester and Term Placenta via Exosomes. Placenta. 2012;33(12):982–990. doi: 10.1016/j.placenta.2012.10.005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Vargas A., Zhou S., Éthier-Chiasson M., Flipo D., Lafond J., Gilbert C., Barbeau B.. Syncytin Proteins Incorporated in Placenta Exosomes Are Important for Cell Uptake and Show Variation in Abundance in Serum Exosomes from Patients with Preeclampsia. FASEB J. 2014;28(8):3703–3719. doi: 10.1096/fj.13-239053. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Miranda J., Paules C., Nair S., Lai A., Palma C., Scholz-Romero K., Rice G. E., Gratacos E., Crispi F., Salomon C.. Placental Exosomes Profile in Maternal and Fetal Circulation in Intrauterine Growth Restriction - Liquid Biopsies to Monitoring Fetal Growth. Placenta. 2018;64:34–43. doi: 10.1016/j.placenta.2018.02.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Menon R., Mesiano S., Taylor R. N.. Programmed Fetal Membrane Senescence and Exosome-Mediated Signaling: A Mechanism Associated With Timing of Human Parturition. Front. Endocrinol. 2017;8:196. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2017.00196. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Rosenfeld C. S.. Placenta Extracellular Vesicles: Messengers Connecting Maternal and Fetal Systems. Biomolecules. 2024;14(8):995. doi: 10.3390/biom14080995. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Jin J., Menon R.. Placental Exosomes: A Proxy to Understand Pregnancy Complications. Am. J. Reprod. Immunol. 2018;79(5):e12788. doi: 10.1111/aji.12788. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Salomon C., Kobayashi M., Ashman K., Sobrevia L., Mitchell M. D., Rice G. E.. Hypoxia-Induced Changes in the Bioactivity of Cytotrophoblast-Derived Exosomes. PLoS One. 2013;8(11):e79636. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0079636. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Bai K., Lee C.-L., Liu X., Li J., Cao D., Zhang L., Hu D., Li H., Hou Y., Xu Y., Kan A. S. Y., Cheung K.-W., Ng E. H. Y., Yeung W. S. B., Chiu P. C. N.. Human Placental Exosomes Induce Maternal Systemic Immune Tolerance by Reprogramming Circulating Monocytes. J. Nanobiotechnol. 2022;20(1):86. doi: 10.1186/s12951-022-01283-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Sheller-Miller S., Choi K., Choi C., Menon R.. Cyclic-Recombinase-Reporter Mouse Model to Determine Exosome Communication and Function during Pregnancy. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2019;221(5):502.e1–502.e12. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.06.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Maligianni I., Yapijakis C., Bacopoulou F., Chrousos G.. The Potential Role of Exosomes in Child and Adolescent Obesity. Children. 2021;8(3):196. doi: 10.3390/children8030196. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Filardi T., Catanzaro G., Mardente S., Zicari A., Santangelo C., Lenzi A., Morano S., Ferretti E.. Non-Coding RNA: Role in Gestational Diabetes Pathophysiology and Complications. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020;21(11):4020. doi: 10.3390/ijms21114020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Yang H., Ma Q., Wang Y., Tang Z.. Clinical Application of Exosomes and Circulating MicroRNAs in the Diagnosis of Pregnancy Complications and Foetal Abnormalities. J. Transl. Med. 2020;18(1):32. doi: 10.1186/s12967-020-02227-w. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Bartel D. P.. MicroRNAs. Cell. 2004;116(2):281–297. doi: 10.1016/S0092-8674(04)00045-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Maligianni I., Yapijakis C., Nousia K., Bacopoulou F., Chrousos G.. Exosomes and Exosomal Non-coding RNAs throughout Human Gestation (Review) Exp. Ther. Med. 2022;24(3):582. doi: 10.3892/etm.2022.11518. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Floriano J. F., Willis G., Catapano F., de Lima P. R., Reis F. V. D. S., Barbosa A. M. P., Rudge M. V. C., Emanueli C.. Exosomes Could Offer New Options to Combat the Long-Term Complications Inflicted by Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. Cells. 2020;9(3):675. doi: 10.3390/cells9030675. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Mitsis T., Pierouli K., Diakou K. I., Papakonstantinou E., Bacopoulou F., Chrousos G. P., Vlachakis D.. Exosomics. EMBnet J. 2020;26:e934. doi: 10.14806/ej.26.0.934. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Chim S. S. C., Shing T. K. F., Hung E. C. W., Leung T., Lau T., Chiu R. W. K., Dennis Lo Y. M.. Detection and Characterization of Placental MicroRNAs in Maternal Plasma. Clin Chem. 2008;54(3):482–490. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2007.097972. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Noguer-Dance M., Abu-Amero S., Al-Khtib M., Lefevre A., Coullin P., Moore G. E., Cavaille J.. The Primate-Specific MicroRNA Gene Cluster (C19MC) Is Imprinted in the Placenta. Hum. Mol. Genet. 2010;19(18):3566–3582. doi: 10.1093/hmg/ddq272. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. Cooke W. R., Cribbs A., Zhang W., Kandzija N., Motta-Mejia C., Dombi E., Ri R., Cerdeira A. S., Redman C., Vatish M.. Maternal Circulating Syncytiotrophoblast-Derived Extracellular Vesicles Contain Biologically Active 5′-TRNA Halves. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2019;518(1):107–113. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2019.08.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Vilella F., Moreno-Moya J. M., Balaguer N., Grasso A., Herrero M., Martínez S., Marcilla A., Simón C.. Hsa-MiR-30d, Secreted by the Human Endometrium, Is Taken up by the Pre-Implantation Embryo and Might Modify Its Transcriptome. Development. 2015;142(18):3210–3221. doi: 10.1242/dev.124289. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. Takahashi H., Ohkuchi A., Kuwata T., Usui R., Baba Y., Suzuki H., Chaw Kyi T. T., Matsubara S., Saito S., Takizawa T.. Endogenous and Exogenous MiR-520c-3p Modulates CD44-Mediated Extravillous Trophoblast Invasion. Placenta. 2017;50:25–31. doi: 10.1016/j.placenta.2016.12.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  65. Kannampuzha S., Ravichandran M., Mukherjee A. G., Wanjari U. R., Renu K., Vellingiri B., Iyer M., Dey A., George A., Gopalakrishnan A. V.. The Mechanism of Action of Non-Coding RNAs in Placental Disorders. Biomed. Pharmacother. 2022;156:113964. doi: 10.1016/j.biopha.2022.113964. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Wang M., Zheng L., Ma S., Lin R., Li J., Yang S.. Biogenesis and Function of Exosome LncRNAs and Their Role in Female Pathological Pregnancy. Front. Endocrinol. 2023;14:1191721. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1191721. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  67. Gurunathan S., Kang M.-H., Song H., Kim N. H., Kim J.-H.. The Role of Extracellular Vesicles in Animal Reproduction and Diseases. J. Anim. Sci. Biotechnol. 2022;13(1):62. doi: 10.1186/s40104-022-00715-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. Chen F., Chen X., Cai W., Ruan H., Fang S.. Mesenchymal Stem Cell-Derived Exosomal Long Noncoding RNA MALAT1-201 Regulated the Proliferation, Apoptosis and Migration of Trophoblast Cells via Targeting MiR-141. Ann. Clin. Lab. Sci. 2022;52(5):741–752. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Gauster M., Moser G., Wernitznig S., Kupper N., Huppertz B.. Early Human Trophoblast Development: From Morphology to Function. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 2022;79(6):345. doi: 10.1007/s00018-022-04377-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. Das M., Kale V.. Extracellular Vesicles: Mediators of Embryo-Maternal Crosstalk during Pregnancy and a New Weapon to Fight against Infertility. Eur. J. Cell Biol. 2020;99(8):151125. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcb.2020.151125. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. Monsivais D., Nagashima T., Prunskaite-Hyyryläinen R., Nozawa K., Shimada K., Tang S., Hamor C., Agno J. E., Chen F., Masand R. P., Young S. L., Creighton C. J., DeMayo F. J., Ikawa M., Lee S.-J., Matzuk M. M.. Endometrial Receptivity and Implantation Require Uterine BMP Signaling through an ACVR2A-SMAD1/SMAD5 Axis. Nat. Commun. 2021;12(1):3386. doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-23571-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  72. Desrochers L. M., Bordeleau F., Reinhart-King C. A., Cerione R. A., Antonyak M. A.. Microvesicles Provide a Mechanism for Intercellular Communication by Embryonic Stem Cells during Embryo Implantation. Nat. Commun. 2016;7(1):11958. doi: 10.1038/ncomms11958. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  73. Hu L., Ma J., Cao M., Lin Y., Long W., Shi Z., Wen J.. Exosomal MRNA and LncRNA Profiles in Cord Blood of Preeclampsia Patients. J. Matern.-Fetal Neonat. Med. 2022;35(25):8199–8209. doi: 10.1080/14767058.2021.1966413. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  74. Ren J., Jin H., Zhu Y.. The Role of Placental Non-Coding RNAs in Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023;24(5):5030. doi: 10.3390/ijms24055030. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  75. Ortega M. A., Fraile-Martínez O., García-Montero C., Paradela A., Asunción Sánchez-Gil M., Rodriguez-Martin S., De León-Luis J. A., Pereda-Cerquella C., Bujan J., Guijarro L. G., Alvarez-Mon M., García-Honduvilla N.. Unfolding the Role of Placental-Derived Extracellular Vesicles in Pregnancy: From Homeostasis to Pathophysiology. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2022;10:1060850. doi: 10.3389/fcell.2022.1060850. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  76. Chang K.-J., Seow K.-M., Chen K.-H.. Preeclampsia: Recent Advances in Predicting, Preventing, and Managing the Maternal and Fetal Life-Threatening Condition. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2023;20(4):2994. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20042994. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  77. Turbeville H. R., Sasser J. M.. Preeclampsia beyond Pregnancy: Long-Term Consequences for Mother and Child. Am. J. Physiol.: Renal Physiol. 2020;318(6):F1315–F1326. doi: 10.1152/ajprenal.00071.2020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  78. Rana S., Lemoine E., Granger J. P., Karumanchi S. A.. Preeclampsia. Circ. Res. 2019;124(7):1094–1112. doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.118.313276. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  79. Salomon C., Rice G. E.. Role of Exosomes in Placental Homeostasis and Pregnancy Disorders. Prog. Mol. Biol. Transl. Sci. 2017;145:163–179. doi: 10.1016/bs.pmbts.2016.12.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  80. Cockell A. P., Learmont J. G., Smárason A. K., Redman C. W. G., Sargent I. L., Poston L.. Human Placental Syncytiotrophoblast Microvillous Membranes Impair Maternal Vascular Endothelial Function. BJOG. 1997;104(2):235–240. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1997.tb11052.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  81. Nishi K., Modi D.. Placental Exosomes in Pregnancy and Preeclampsia. Am. J. Reprod. Immunol. 2024;91(5):e13857. doi: 10.1111/aji.13857. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  82. Li H., Ouyang Y., Sadovsky E., Parks W. T., Chu T., Sadovsky Y.. Unique MicroRNA Signals in Plasma Exosomes from Pregnancies Complicated by Preeclampsia. Hypertension. 2020;75(3):762–771. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.119.14081. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  83. Devor E., Santillan D., Scroggins S., Warrier A., Santillan M.. Trimester-Specific Plasma Exosome MicroRNA Expression Profiles in Preeclampsia. J. Matern.-Fetal Neonat. Med. 2020;33(18):3116–3124. doi: 10.1080/14767058.2019.1569614. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  84. Matsubara K., Matsubara Y., Uchikura Y., Sugiyama T.. Pathophysiology of Preeclampsia: The Role of Exosomes. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021;22(5):2572. doi: 10.3390/ijms22052572. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  85. Salomon C., Guanzon D., Scholz-Romero K., Longo S., Correa P., Illanes S. E., Rice G. E.. Placental Exosomes as Early Biomarker of Preeclampsia: Potential Role of Exosomal MicroRNAs Across Gestation. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2017;102(9):3182–3194. doi: 10.1210/jc.2017-00672. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  86. Ermini L., Ausman J., Melland-Smith M., Yeganeh B., Rolfo A., Litvack M. L., Todros T., Letarte M., Post M., Caniggia I.. A Single Sphingomyelin Species Promotes Exosomal Release of Endoglin into the Maternal Circulation in Preeclampsia. Sci. Rep. 2017;7(1):12172. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-12491-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  87. Shan Y., Hou B., Wang J., Chen A., Liu S.. Exploring the Role of Exosomal MicroRNAs as Potential Biomarkers in Preeclampsia. Front. Immunol. 2024;15:1385950. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1385950. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  88. Qi J., Wu B., Chen X., Wei W., Yao X.. Diagnostic Biomolecules and Combination Therapy for Pre-Eclampsia. Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol. 2022;20(1):136. doi: 10.1186/s12958-022-01003-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  89. Anton L., Olarerin-George A. O., Schwartz N., Srinivas S., Bastek J., Hogenesch J. B., Elovitz M. A.. MiR-210 Inhibits Trophoblast Invasion and Is a Serum Biomarker for Preeclampsia. Am. J. Pathol. 2013;183(5):1437–1445. doi: 10.1016/j.ajpath.2013.07.021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  90. Jaszczuk I., Koczkodaj D., Kondracka A., Kwaśniewska A., Winkler I., Filip A.. The Role of MiRNA-210 in Pre-Eclampsia Development. Ann. Med. 2022;54(1):1350–1356. doi: 10.1080/07853890.2022.2071459. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  91. Zaccagnini G., Maimone B., Fuschi P., Maselli D., Spinetti G., Gaetano C., Martelli F.. Overexpression of MiR-210 and Its Significance in Ischemic Tissue Damage. Sci. Rep. 2017;7(1):9563. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-09763-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  92. Jairajpuri D. S., Malalla Z. H., Sarray S., Mahmood N.. Analysis of Differential Expression of Hypoxia-Inducible MicroRNA-210 Gene Targets in Mild and Severe Preeclamptic Patients. Non-coding RNA Res. 2021;6(1):51–57. doi: 10.1016/j.ncrna.2021.03.001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  93. Dahiya, D. ; Smith, J. ; Strickland, T. ; Morris, D. ; Reschke, C. ; Engel, T. ; Henshall, D. ; McCoy, C. E. ; Dowling, J. K. . A Role for Myeloid miR-155 in Regulating Hypoxia Induced Seizures in Neonatal C57BL/J6Mice. bioRxiv 2022, 2022.09.22.508924. 10.1101/2022.09.22.508924. [DOI]
  94. Wu H.-Y., liu K., Zhang J.-L.. LINC00240/MiR-155 Axis Regulates Function of Trophoblasts and M2Macrophage Polarization via Modulating Oxidative Stress-Induced Pyroptosis in Preeclampsia. Mol. Med. 2022;28(1):119. doi: 10.1186/s10020-022-00531-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  95. Du J., Ji Q., Dong L., Meng Y., Xin G.. HDAC4 Knockdown Induces Preeclampsia Cell Autophagy and Apoptosis by MiR-29b. Reprod. Sci. 2021;28(2):334–342. doi: 10.1007/s43032-020-00286-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  96. Li P., Guo W., Du L., Zhao J., Wang Y., Liu L., Hu Y., Hou Y.. MicroRNA-29b Contributes to Pre-Eclampsia through Its Effects on Apoptosis, Invasion and Angiogenesis of Trophoblast Cells. Clin. Sci. 2013;124(1):27–40. doi: 10.1042/CS20120121. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  97. Villalobos-Labra R., Liu R., Spaans F., Sáez T., Semeria Maitret T., Quon A., Sawamura T., Cooke C.-L. M., Davidge S. T.. Placenta-Derived Extracellular Vesicles From Preeclamptic Pregnancies Impair Vascular Endothelial Function via Lectin-Like Oxidized LDL Receptor-1. Hypertension. 2023;80(10):2226–2238. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.123.21205. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  98. Kramer C. K., Campbell S., Retnakaran R.. Gestational Diabetes and the Risk of Cardiovascular Disease in Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Diabetologia. 2019;62(6):905–914. doi: 10.1007/s00125-019-4840-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  99. Giannakou K., Evangelou E., Yiallouros P., Christophi C. A., Middleton N., Papatheodorou E., Papatheodorou S. I.. Risk Factors for Gestational Diabetes: An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses of Observational Studies. PLoS One. 2019;14(4):e0215372. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0215372. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  100. Schwartz N., Nachum Z., Green M. S.. The Prevalence of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus RecurrenceEffect of Ethnicity and Parity: A Metaanalysis. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2015;213(3):310–317. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2015.03.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  101. Saeedi M., Cao Y., Fadl H., Gustafson H., Simmons D.. Increasing Prevalence of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus When Implementing the IADPSG Criteria: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Diabetes Res. Clin. Pract. 2021;172:108642. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2020.108642. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  102. Behboudi-Gandevani S., Amiri M., Bidhendi Yarandi R., Ramezani Tehrani F.. The Impact of Diagnostic Criteria for Gestational Diabetes on Its Prevalence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Diabetol. Metab. Syndr. 2019;11(1):11. doi: 10.1186/s13098-019-0406-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  103. Nguyen-Ngo C., Jayabalan N., Salomon C., Lappas M.. Molecular Pathways Disrupted by Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. J. Mol. Endocrinol. 2019;63(3):R51–R72. doi: 10.1530/JME-18-0274. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  104. Burger D., Schock S., Thompson C. S., Montezano A. C., Hakim A. M., Touyz R. M.. Microparticles: Biomarkers and Beyond. Clin. Sci. 2013;124(7):423–441. doi: 10.1042/CS20120309. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  105. Witwer K. W., Buzás E. I., Bemis L. T., Bora A., Lässer C., Lötvall J., Nolte-‘t Hoen E. N., Piper M. G., Sivaraman S., Skog J., Théry C., Wauben M. H., Hochberg F.. Standardization of Sample Collection, Isolation and Analysis Methods in Extracellular Vesicle Research. J. Extracell. Vesicles. 2013;2(1):20360. doi: 10.3402/jev.v2i0.20360. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  106. Salomon C., Scholz-Romero K., Sarker S., Sweeney E., Kobayashi M., Correa P., Longo S., Duncombe G., Mitchell M. D., Rice G. E., Illanes S. E.. Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Is Associated With Changes in the Concentration and Bioactivity of Placenta-Derived Exosomes in Maternal Circulation Across Gestation. Diabetes. 2016;65(3):598–609. doi: 10.2337/db15-0966. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  107. Wang Y., Yuan Y., Shen S., Ge Z., Zhu D., Bi Y.. Placenta-Derived Exosomes Exacerbate Beta Cell Dysfunction in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus through Delivery of MiR-320b. Front. Endocrinol. 2024;14:1282075. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1282075. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  108. Santovito D., De Nardis V., Marcantonio P., Mandolini C., Paganelli C., Vitale E., Buttitta F., Bucci M., Mezzetti A., Consoli A., Cipollone F.. Plasma Exosome MicroRNA Profiling Unravels a New Potential Modulator of Adiponectin Pathway in Diabetes: Effect of Glycemic Control. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2014;99(9):E1681–E1685. doi: 10.1210/jc.2013-3843. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  109. Ehrlich S., Lambers D., Baccarelli A., Khoury J., Macaluso M., Ho S.-M.. Endocrine Disruptors: A Potential Risk Factor for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. Am. J. Perinatol. 2016;33(13):1313–1318. doi: 10.1055/s-0036-1586500. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  110. James-Allan L. B., Rosario F. J., Barner K., Lai A., Guanzon D., McIntyre H. D., Lappas M., Powell T. L., Salomon C., Jansson T.. Regulation of Glucose Homeostasis by Small Extracellular Vesicles in Normal Pregnancy and in Gestational Diabetes. FASEB J. 2020;34(4):5724–5739. doi: 10.1096/fj.201902522RR. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  111. Zhang Z., Xu Q., Chen Y., Sui L., Jiang L., Shen Q., Li M., Li G., Wang Q.. The Possible Role of Visceral Fat in Early Pregnancy as a Predictor of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus by Regulating Adipose-Derived Exosomes MiRNA-148 Family: Protocol for a Nested Case-Control Study in a Cohort Study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2021;21(1):262. doi: 10.1186/s12884-021-03737-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  112. Yang Z., Wei Z., Wu X., Yang H.. Screening of Exosomal MiRNAs Derived from Subcutaneous and Visceral Adipose Tissues: Determination of Targets for the Treatment of Obesity and Associated Metabolic Disorders. Mol. Med. Rep. 2018;18:3314–3324. doi: 10.3892/mmr.2018.9312. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  113. Londoño Gentile T., Lu C., Lodato P. M., Tse S., Olejniczak S. H., Witze E. S., Thompson C. B., Wellen K. E.. DNMT1 Is Regulated by ATP-Citrate Lyase and Maintains Methylation Patterns during Adipocyte Differentiation. Mol. Cell. Biol. 2013;33(19):3864–3878. doi: 10.1128/MCB.01495-12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  114. Ferrante S. C., Nadler E. P., Pillai D. K., Hubal M. J., Wang Z., Wang J. M., Gordish-Dressman H., Koeck E., Sevilla S., Wiles A. A., Freishtat R. J.. Adipocyte-Derived Exosomal MiRNAs: A Novel Mechanism for Obesity-Related Disease. Pediatr. Res. 2015;77(3):447–454. doi: 10.1038/pr.2014.202. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  115. Liu Z.-N., Jiang Y., Liu X.-Q., Yang M.-M., Chen C., Zhao B.-H., Huang H.-F., Luo Q.. MiRNAs in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Potential Mechanisms and Clinical Applications. J. Diabetes Res. 2021;2021:1–14. doi: 10.1155/2021/4632745. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  116. Shah K. B., Fields D. A., Pezant N. P., Kharoud H. K., Gulati S., Jacobs K., Gale C. A., Kharbanda E. O., Nagel E. M., Demerath E. W., Tryggestad J. B.. Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Is Associated with Altered Abundance of Exosomal MicroRNAs in Human Milk. Clin. Ther. 2022;44(2):172–185.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2022.01.005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  117. Chen T., Liu D.. The Mystery of Exosomes in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. Oxid. Med. Cell. Longevity. 2022;2022:2169259. doi: 10.1155/2022/2169259. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  118. Das M., Patidar H., Singh M.. Understanding Trimester-Specific Miscarriage Risk in Indian Women: Insights from the Calendar Data of National Family Health Survey (NFHS-5) 2019–21. BMC Womens Health. 2024;24(1):63. doi: 10.1186/s12905-023-02838-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  119. Zhang Y., Tang Y., Sun X., Kang M., Zhao M., Wan J., Chen Q.. Exporting Proteins Associated with Senescence Repair via Extracellular Vesicles May Be Associated with Early Pregnancy Loss. Cells. 2022;11(18):2772. doi: 10.3390/cells11182772. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  120. Rajaratnam N., Ditlevsen N. E., Sloth J. K., Bæk R., Jørgensen M. M., Christiansen O. B.. Extracellular Vesicles: An Important Biomarker in Recurrent Pregnancy Loss? J. Clin. Med. 2021;10(12):2549. doi: 10.3390/jcm10122549. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  121. Garrido-Gimenez C., Alijotas-Reig J.. Recurrent Miscarriage: Causes, Evaluation and Management. Postgrad. Med. J. 2015;91(1073):151–162. doi: 10.1136/postgradmedj-2014-132672. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  122. Alijotas-Reig J., Palacio-Garcia C., Llurba E., Vilardell-Tarres M.. Cell-Derived Microparticles and Vascular Pregnancy Complications: A Systematic and Comprehensive Review. Fertil. Steril. 2013;99(2):441–449. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.10.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  123. Sheller-Miller S., Trivedi J., Yellon S. M., Menon R.. Exosomes Cause Preterm Birth in Mice: Evidence for Paracrine Signaling in Pregnancy. Sci. Rep. 2019;9(1):608. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-37002-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  124. Zhao Q., Ma Z., Wang X., Liang M., Wang W., Su F., Yang H., Gao Y., Ren Y.. Lipidomic Biomarkers of Extracellular Vesicles for the Prediction of Preterm Birth in the Early Second Trimester. J. Proteome Res. 2020;19(10):4104–4113. doi: 10.1021/acs.jproteome.0c00525. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  125. Burton G. J., Jauniaux E.. Placental Oxidative Stress: From Miscarriage to Preeclampsia. J. Soc. Gynecol. Investig. 2004;11(6):342–352. doi: 10.1016/j.jsgi.2004.03.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  126. Cindrova-Davies T., Fogarty N. M. E., Jones C. J. P., Kingdom J., Burton G. J.. Evidence of Oxidative Stress-Induced Senescence in Mature, Post-Mature and Pathological Human Placentas. Placenta. 2018;68:15–22. doi: 10.1016/j.placenta.2018.06.307. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  127. Zhou Q., Xiong Y., Qu B., Bao A., Zhang Y.. DNA Methylation and Recurrent Pregnancy Loss: A Mysterious Compass? Front. Immunol. 2021;12:738962. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.738962. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  128. Chong W., Shastri M., Eri R.. Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress and Oxidative Stress: A Vicious Nexus Implicated in Bowel Disease Pathophysiology. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2017;18(4):771. doi: 10.3390/ijms18040771. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  129. Tang Y., Zhang X., Zhang Y., Feng H., Gao J., Liu H., Guo F., Chen Q.. Senescent Changes and Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress May Be Involved in the Pathogenesis of Missed Miscarriage. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2021;9:656549. doi: 10.3389/fcell.2021.656549. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  130. Ma R., Liang Z., Shi X., Xu L., Li X., Wu J., Zhao L., Liu G.. Exosomal MiR-486–5p Derived from Human Placental Microvascular Endothelial Cells Regulates Proliferation and Invasion of Trophoblasts via Targeting IGF1. Hum. Cell. 2021;34(5):1310–1323. doi: 10.1007/s13577-021-00543-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  131. Chen Y., Ding H., Wei M., Zha W., Guan S., Liu N., Li Y., Tan Y., Wang Y., Wu F.. MSC-Secreted Exosomal H19 Promotes Trophoblast Cell Invasion and Migration by Downregulating Let-7b and Upregulating FOXO1. Mol. Ther. Nucleic Acids. 2020;19:1237–1249. doi: 10.1016/j.omtn.2019.11.031. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  132. Medegan Fagla B., Buhimschi I. A.. Protein Misfolding in Pregnancy: Current Insights, Potential Mechanisms, and Implications for the Pathogenesis of Preeclampsia. Molecules. 2024;29(3):610. doi: 10.3390/molecules29030610. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  133. Guzel E., Arlier S., Guzeloglu-Kayisli O., Tabak M., Ekiz T., Semerci N., Larsen K., Schatz F., Lockwood C., Kayisli U.. Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress and Homeostasis in Reproductive Physiology and Pathology. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2017;18(4):792. doi: 10.3390/ijms18040792. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  134. Gangadaran P., Madhyastha H., Madhyastha R., Rajendran R. L., Nakajima Y., Watanabe N., Velikkakath A. K. G., Hong C. M., Gopi R. V., Muthukalianan G. K., Valsala Gopalakrishnan A., Jeyaraman M., Ahn B.-C.. The Emerging Role of Exosomes in Innate Immunity, Diagnosis and Therapy. Front. Immunol. 2023;13:1085057. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.1085057. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  135. Burlingham W. J.. Extracellular Vesicles in Fetal-Maternal Immune Tolerance. Biomed. J. 2024;47(5):100785. doi: 10.1016/j.bj.2024.100785. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  136. Abu-Raya B., Michalski C., Sadarangani M., Lavoie P. M.. Maternal Immunological Adaptation During Normal Pregnancy. Front. Immunol. 2020;11:575197. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.575197. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  137. Shi H., Yang Z., Cui J., Tao H., Ma R., Zhao Y.. Mesenchymal Stem Cell-Derived Exosomes: A Promising Alternative in the Therapy of Preeclampsia. Stem Cell Res. Ther. 2024;15(1):30. doi: 10.1186/s13287-024-03652-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  138. Mor G., Aldo P., Alvero A. B.. The Unique Immunological and Microbial Aspects of Pregnancy. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2017;17(8):469–482. doi: 10.1038/nri.2017.64. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  139. Hromadnikova I., Dvorakova L., Kotlabova K., Krofta L.. The Prediction of Gestational Hypertension, Preeclampsia and Fetal Growth Restriction via the First Trimester Screening of Plasma Exosomal C19MC MicroRNAs. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019;20(12):2972. doi: 10.3390/ijms20122972. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  140. Moore, K. L. ; Persaud, T. V. N. . The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 10th ed.; Elsevier Health Sciences, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  141. Zhuang B., Shang J., Yao Y.. HLA-G: An Important Mediator of Maternal-Fetal Immune-Tolerance. Front. Immunol. 2021;12:744324. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.744324. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  142. Mincheva-Nilsson, L. ; Baranov, V. . Placenta-Derived Exosomes and Their Role in the Immune Protection of the Fetus. In Recent Advances in Research on the Human Placenta; InTech, 2012. 10.5772/32445. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  143. Nair S., Salomon C.. Extracellular Vesicles and Their Immunomodulatory Functions in Pregnancy. Semin. Immunopathol. 2018;40(5):425–437. doi: 10.1007/s00281-018-0680-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  144. Albonici L., Benvenuto M., Focaccetti C., Cifaldi L., Miele M. T., Limana F., Manzari V., Bei R.. PlGF Immunological Impact during Pregnancy. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020;21(22):8714. doi: 10.3390/ijms21228714. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  145. Mincheva-Nilsson L.. Immunosuppressive Protein Signatures Carried by Syncytiotrophoblast-Derived Exosomes and Their Role in Human Pregnancy. Front. Immunol. 2021;12:717884. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.717884. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  146. Li L., Zhang Z., Li H., Zhou M., Li F., Chu C., Zhang Y., Zhu X., Ju H., Li X.. Research Progress on the STAT Signaling Pathway in Pregnancy and Pregnancy-Associated Disorders. Front. Immunol. 2024;14:1331964. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1331964. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  147. Southcombe J., Tannetta D., Redman C., Sargent I.. The Immunomodulatory Role of Syncytiotrophoblast Microvesicles. PLoS One. 2011;6(5):e20245. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0020245. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  148. Smallin, M. ; Hall, M. ; Lockhart, J. H. ; Beatty, M. ; Devrapalli, V. ; Pilon-Thomas, S. ; Brohl, A. S. . 887 The Chromosome 19 MicroRNA Cluster Facilitates TIL-Based Immune Evasion in Human Melanoma. In Regular and Young Investigator Award Abstracts; BMJ Publishing Group Ltd, 2024; pp A1001–A1001 10.1136/jitc-2024-SITC2024.0887. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  149. Murrieta-Coxca J. M., Fuentes-Zacarias P., Ospina-Prieto S., Markert U. R., Morales-Prieto D. M.. Synergies of Extracellular Vesicles and Microchimerism in Promoting Immunotolerance During Pregnancy. Front. Immunol. 2022;13:837281. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.837281. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  150. Mora-Palazuelos C., Villegas-Mercado C. E., Avendaño-Félix M., Lizárraga-Verdugo E., Romero-Quintana J. G., López-Gutiérrez J., Beltrán-Ontiveros S., Bermúdez M.. The Role of NcRNAs in the Immune Dysregulation of Preeclampsia. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023;24(20):15215. doi: 10.3390/ijms242015215. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  151. Erasha A. M., EL-Gendy H., Aly A. S., Fernández-Ortiz M., Sayed R. K. A.. The Role of the Tumor Microenvironment (TME) in Advancing Cancer Therapies: Immune System Interactions, Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes (TILs), and the Role of Exosomes and Inflammasomes. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2025;26(6):2716. doi: 10.3390/ijms26062716. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  152. El Safadi D., Mokhtari A., Krejbich M., Lagrave A., Hirigoyen U., Lebeau G., Viranaicken W., Krejbich-Trotot P.. Exosome-Mediated Antigen Delivery: Unveiling Novel Strategies in Viral Infection Control and Vaccine Design. Vaccines. 2024;12(3):280. doi: 10.3390/vaccines12030280. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  153. Razizadeh M. H., Zafarani A., Taghavi-Farahabadi M., Khorramdelazad H., Minaeian S., Mahmoudi M.. Natural Killer Cells and Their Exosomes in Viral Infections and Related Therapeutic Approaches: Where Are We? Cell Commun. Signaling. 2023;21(1):261. doi: 10.1186/s12964-023-01266-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  154. Aloi N., Drago G., Ruggieri S., Cibella F., Colombo P., Longo V.. Extracellular Vesicles and Immunity: At the Crossroads of Cell Communication. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024;25(2):1205. doi: 10.3390/ijms25021205. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  155. Pillay P., Moodley K., Vatish M., Moodley J.. Exosomal MicroRNAs in Pregnancy Provides Insight into a Possible Cure for Cancer. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020;21(15):5384. doi: 10.3390/ijms21155384. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  156. Fang Z., Mao J., Huang J., Sun H., Lu X., Lei H., Dong J., Chen S., Wang X.. Increased Levels of Villus-Derived Exosomal MiR-29a-3p in Normal Pregnancy than URPL Patients Suppresses Decidual NK Cell Production of Interferon-γ and Exerts a Therapeutic Effect in Abortion-Prone Mice. Cell Commun. Signaling. 2024;22(1):230. doi: 10.1186/s12964-024-01610-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  157. Yang J., Li L., Wang L., Chen R., Yang X., Wu J., Feng G., Ding J., Diao L., Chen J., Yang J.. Trophoblast-Derived MiR-410–5p Induces M2Macrophage Polarization and Mediates Immunotolerance at the Fetal-Maternal Interface by Targeting the STAT1 Signaling Pathway. J. Transl. Med. 2024;22(1):19. doi: 10.1186/s12967-023-04831-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  158. Wei X., Yang X.. The Central Role of Natural Killer Cells in Preeclampsia. Front. Immunol. 2023;14:1009867. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1009867. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  159. Dietz S., Schwarz J., Rühle J., Schaller M., Fehrenbacher B., Marmé A., Schmid E., Peter A., Poets C. F., Gille C., Köstlin-Gille N.. Extracellular Vesicles Released by Myeloid-Derived Suppressor Cells from Pregnant Women Modulate Adaptive Immune Responses. Cell. Immunol. 2021;361:104276. doi: 10.1016/j.cellimm.2020.104276. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  160. Szekeres-Bartho J., Šućurović S., Mulac-Jeričević B.. The Role of Extracellular Vesicles and PIBF in Embryo-Maternal Immune-Interactions. Front. Immunol. 2018;9:2890. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.02890. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  161. Taglauer E. S., Fernandez-Gonzalez A., Willis G. R., Reis M., Yeung V., Liu X., Mitsialis S. A., Kourembanas S.. Mesenchymal Stromal Cell-Derived Extracellular Vesicle Therapy Prevents Preeclamptic Physiology through Intrauterine Immunomodulation†. Biol. Reprod. 2021;104(2):457–467. doi: 10.1093/biolre/ioaa198. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  162. Devvanshi H., Kachhwaha R., Manhswita A., Bhatnagar S., Kshetrapal P.. Immunological Changes in Pregnancy and Prospects of Therapeutic Pla-Xosomes in Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes. Front. Pharmacol. 2022;13:895254. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2022.895254. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  163. Yaghoobi A., Nazerian Y., Meymand A. Z., Ansari A., Nazerian A., Niknejad H.. Hypoxia-Sensitive MiRNA Regulation via CRISPR/DCas9 Loaded in Hybrid Exosomes: A Novel Strategy to Improve Embryo Implantation and Prevent Placental Insufficiency during Pregnancy. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2023;10:1082657. doi: 10.3389/fcell.2022.1082657. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  164. Bateman B. T., Bansil P., Hernandez-Diaz S., Mhyre J. M., Callaghan W. M., Kuklina E. V.. Prevalence, Trends, and Outcomes of Chronic Hypertension: A Nationwide Sample of Delivery Admissions. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2012;206(2):134.e1–134.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2011.10.878. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  165. Sanjulián L., Lamas A., Barreiro R., Cepeda A., Fente C., Regal P.. Influence of Maternal Diet and Lactation Time on the Exosomal MiRNA Cargo in Breast Milk. Foods. 2025;14(6):1003. doi: 10.3390/foods14061003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  166. Melnik B. C., Stremmel W., Weiskirchen R., John S. M., Schmitz G.. Exosome-Derived MicroRNAs of Human Milk and Their Effects on Infant Health and Development. Biomolecules. 2021;11(6):851. doi: 10.3390/biom11060851. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  167. Chutipongtanate S., Morrow A. L., Newburg D. S.. Human Milk Extracellular Vesicles: A Biological System with Clinical Implications. Cells. 2022;11(15):2345. doi: 10.3390/cells11152345. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  168. Kalia V., Baccarelli A. A., Happel C., Hollander J. A., Jukic A. M., McAllister K. A., Menon R., Merrick B. A., Milosavljevic A., Ravichandran L. V., Roth M. E., Subramanian A., Tyson F. L., Worth L., Shaughnessy D. T.. Seminar: Extracellular Vesicles as Mediators of Environmental Stress in Human Disease. Environ. Health Perspect. 2023;131(10):104201. doi: 10.1289/EHP12980. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  169. Javdani-Mallak A., Salahshoori I.. Environmental Pollutants and Exosomes: A New Paradigm in Environmental Health and Disease. Sci. Total Environ. 2024;925:171774. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.171774. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  170. Ramos-Lopez O., Milagro F. I., Riezu-Boj J. I., Martinez J. A.. Epigenetic Signatures Underlying Inflammation: An Interplay of Nutrition, Physical Activity, Metabolic Diseases, and Environmental Factors for Personalized Nutrition. Inflammation Res. 2021;70(1):29–49. doi: 10.1007/s00011-020-01425-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  171. Kim K.-U., Han K., Kim J., Kwon D. H., Ji Y. W., Yi D. Y., Min H.. The Protective Role of Exosome-Derived MicroRNAs and Proteins from Human Breast Milk against Infectious Agents. Metabolites. 2023;13(5):635. doi: 10.3390/metabo13050635. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  172. Qi J., Wu B., Chen X., Wei W., Yao X.. Diagnostic Biomolecules and Combination Therapy for Pre-Eclampsia. Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol. 2022;20(1):136. doi: 10.1186/s12958-022-01003-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  173. Fu Q., Fu L.. Engineering Nanosystems for Regulating Reproductive Health in Women. Theranostics. 2025;15(2):439–459. doi: 10.7150/thno.102626. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  174. Dong X., Lin Y., Li K., Liang G., Huang X., Pan J., Wang L., Zhang D., Liu T., Wang T., Yan X., Zhang L., Li X., Qu X., Jia D., Li Y., Zhang H.. Consensus Statement on Extracellular Vesicles in Liquid Biopsy for Advancing Laboratory Medicine. Clin. Chem. Lab. Med. 2025;63(3):465–482. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2024-0188. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  175. Díaz M., Quesada-López T., Villarroya F., Casano P., López-Bermejo A., de Zegher F., Ibáñez L.. The Proteome of Exosomes at Birth Predicts Insulin Resistance, Adrenarche and Liver Fat in Childhood. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2025;26(4):1721. doi: 10.3390/ijms26041721. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  176. Lee J., Lee N. K., Moon J. H.. Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Mechanisms Underlying Maternal and Fetal Complications. Endocrinol. Metab. 2025;40(1):10–25. doi: 10.3803/EnM.2024.2264. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  177. Beal J. R., Ma Q., Bagchi I. C., Bagchi M. K.. Role of Endometrial Extracellular Vesicles in Mediating Cell-to-Cell Communication in the Uterus: A Review. Cells. 2023;12(22):2584. doi: 10.3390/cells12222584. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  178. Abeysinghe P., Turner N., Mosaad E., Logan J., Mitchell M. D.. Dynamics of Inflammatory Cytokine Expression in Bovine Endometrial Cells Exposed to Cow Blood Plasma Small Extracellular Vesicles (SEV) May Reflect High Fertility. Sci. Rep. 2023;13(1):5425. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-32045-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  179. Cavallini C., Zannini C., Olivi E., Tassinari R., Taglioli V., Rossi M., Poggi P., Chatgilialoglu A., Simonazzi G., Alviano F., Bonsi L., Ventura C.. Restoring In Vivo-Like Membrane Lipidomics Promotes Exosome Trophic Behavior from Human Placental Mesenchymal Stromal/Stem Cells. Cell Transplant. 2018;27(1):55–69. doi: 10.1177/0963689717723016. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  180. Murugesan S., Saravanakumar L., Sadayappan S., Kannappan R., Sinkey R. G., Tubinis M. D., Tita A. N., Jilling T., Berkowitz D. E.. Placental Extracellular Vesicles from Women with Severe Preeclampsia Alter Calcium Homeostasis in Cardiomyocytes: An Ex Vivo Study. Am. J. Physiol.: Cell Physiol. 2025;328(1):C128–C138. doi: 10.1152/ajpcell.00409.2024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  181. Shami-shah A., Travis B. G., Walt D. R.. Advances in Extracellular Vesicle Isolation Methods: A Path towards Cell-Type Specific EV Isolation. Extracell. Vesicles Circ. Nucl. Acids. 2023;4(3):447–460. doi: 10.20517/evcna.2023.14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  182. Mitchell M. I., Ma J., Carter C. L., Loudig O.. Circulating Exosome Cargoes Contain Functionally Diverse Cancer Biomarkers: From Biogenesis and Function to Purification and Potential Translational Utility. Cancers. 2022;14(14):3350. doi: 10.3390/cancers14143350. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  183. Gorgzadeh A., Nazari A., Ali Ehsan Ismaeel A., Safarzadeh D., Hassan J. A. K., Mohammadzadehsaliani S., Kheradjoo H., Yasamineh P., Yasamineh S.. A State-of-the-Art Review of the Recent Advances in Exosome Isolation and Detection Methods in Viral Infection. Virol. J. 2024;21(1):34. doi: 10.1186/s12985-024-02301-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  184. Shi L., Esfandiari L.. Emerging On-chip Electrokinetic Based Technologies for Purification of Circulating Cancer Biomarkers towards Liquid Biopsy: A Review. Electrophoresis. 2022;43(1–2):288–308. doi: 10.1002/elps.202100234. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  185. Yaman S., Devoe T., Aygun U., Parlatan U., Bobbili M. R., Karim A. H., Grillari J., Durmus N. G.. EV-Lev: Extracellular Vesicle Isolation from Human Plasma Using Microfluidic Magnetic Levitation Device. Lab Chip. 2025;25(6):1439–1451. doi: 10.1039/D4LC00830H. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  186. Kozhevnikova D., Chernyshev V., Yashchenok A.. Progress in Isolation and Molecular Profiling of Small Extracellular Vesicles via Bead-Assisted Platforms. Biosensors. 2023;13(7):688. doi: 10.3390/bios13070688. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  187. Sonbhadra S., Mehak, Pandey L. M.. Biogenesis, Isolation, and Detection of Exosomes and Their Potential in Therapeutics and Diagnostics. Biosensors. 2023;13(8):802. doi: 10.3390/bios13080802. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  188. Mitchell M. I., Khalil M., Ben-Dov I. Z., Alverez-Perez J., Illsley N. P., Zamudio S., Al-Khan A., Loudig O.. Customizing EV-CATCHER to Purify Placental Extracellular Vesicles from Maternal Plasma to Detect Placental Pathologies. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024;25(10):5102. doi: 10.3390/ijms25105102. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  189. Poon L. C., Shennan A., Hyett J. A., Kapur A., Hadar E., Divakar H., McAuliffe F., da Silva Costa F., von Dadelszen P., McIntyre H. D., Kihara A. B., Di Renzo G. C., Romero R., D’Alton M., Berghella V., Nicolaides K. H., Hod M.. The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) Initiative on Pre-eclampsia: A Pragmatic Guide for First-trimester Screening and Prevention. Int. J. Gynecol. Obstet. 2019;145(S1):1–33. doi: 10.1002/ijgo.12802. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  190. Roberts J. M., Pearson G., Cutler J., Lindheimer M.. Summary of the NHLBI Working Group on Research on Hypertension During Pregnancy. Hypertension. 2003;41(3):437–445. doi: 10.1161/01.HYP.0000054981.03589.E9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  191. McIntyre H. D., Catalano P., Zhang C., Desoye G., Mathiesen E. R., Damm P.. Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. Nat. Rev. Dis. Primers. 2019;5(1):47. doi: 10.1038/s41572-019-0098-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  192. Chiefari E., Arcidiacono B., Foti D., Brunetti A.. Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: An Updated Overview. J. Endocrinol. Invest. 2017;40(9):899–909. doi: 10.1007/s40618-016-0607-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  193. Jiang B., Zhang J., Sun X., Yang C., Cheng G., Xu M., Li S., Wang L.. Circulating Exosomal Hsa_circRNA_0039480 Is Highly Expressed in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus and May Be Served as a Biomarker for Early Diagnosis of GDM. J. Transl. Med. 2022;20(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s12967-021-03195-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  194. Kim W., Park S. K., Kim Y. L.. Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Diagnosed at 24 to 28 Weeks of Gestation in Older and Obese Women: Is It Too Late? PLoS One. 2019;14(12):e0225955. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0225955. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  195. Gál L., Fóthi Á., Orosz G., Nagy S., Than N. G., Orbán T. I.. Exosomal Small RNA Profiling in First-Trimester Maternal Blood Explores Early Molecular Pathways of Preterm Preeclampsia. Front. Immunol. 2024;15:1321191. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1321191. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  196. Popova A. K., Vashukova E. S., Illarionov R. A., Maltseva A. R., Pachuliia O. V., Postnikova T. B., Glotov A. S.. Extracellular Vesicles as Biomarkers of Pregnancy Complications. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024;25(22):11944. doi: 10.3390/ijms252211944. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  197. Xu X.-R., Cheng L., Wang Y.-P.. Prediction of Severe Preeclampsia and Intrauterine Growth Restriction Based on Serum Placental Exosome MiR-520a-5p Levels during the First-Trimester. Medicine. 2024;103(20):e38188. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000038188. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  198. Sun Y., Wang Z., Li J., Wang T., Tan Y.. Proteomics Analysis of Plasm Exosomes in Early Pregnancy among Normal Pregnant Women and Those with Antiphospholipid Syndrome. Heliyon. 2024;10(8):e29224. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e29224. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  199. Sun B., Cao Q., Meng M., Wang X.. MicroRNA-186–5p Serves as a Diagnostic Biomarker in Atherosclerosis and Regulates Vascular Smooth Muscle Cell Proliferation and Migration. Cell Mol. Biol. Lett. 2020;25(1):27. doi: 10.1186/s11658-020-00220-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  200. Bathla T., Abolbaghaei A., Reyes A. B., Burger D.. Extracellular Vesicles in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Scoping Review. Diab. Vasc. Dis. Res. 2022;19(2):35395915. doi: 10.1177/14791641221093901. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  201. Dehghan Z., Rezaee D., Noori E., pilehchi T., Saberi F., Taheri Z., Darya G., Mehdinejadiani S.. Exosomes as Modulators of Embryo Implantation. Mol. Biol. Rep. 2024;51(1):284. doi: 10.1007/s11033-024-09282-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  202. Kuc S., Wortelboer E. J., van Rijn B. B., Franx A., Visser G. H. A., Schielen P. C. J. I.. Evaluation of 7 Serum Biomarkers and Uterine Artery Doppler Ultrasound for First-Trimester Prediction of Preeclampsia: A Systematic Review. Obstet. Gynecol. Surv. 2011;66(4):225–239. doi: 10.1097/OGX.0b013e3182227027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  203. Wortelboer E., Koster M., Cuckle H., Stoutenbeek P., Schielen P., Visser G.. First-trimester Placental Protein 13 and Placental Growth Factor: Markers for Identification of Women Destined to Develop Early-onset Pre-eclampsia. BJOG. 2010;117(11):1384–1389. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02690.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  204. Mitrovic K., Zivotic I., Kolic I., Zakula J., Zivkovic M., Stankovic A., Jovanovic I.. A Preliminary Study of the MiRNA Restitution Effect on CNV-Induced MiRNA Downregulation in CAKUT. BMC Genomics. 2024;25(1):218. doi: 10.1186/s12864-024-10121-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  205. Xiong Y., Fang Z., Dong J., Chen S., Mao J., Zhang W., Hai L., Zhou J., Wang X.. Maternal Circulating Exosomal MiR-185–5p Levels as a Predictive Biomarker in Patients with Recurrent Pregnancy Loss. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 2023;40(3):553–566. doi: 10.1007/s10815-023-02733-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  206. Yoshikawa K., Kiyoshima C., Hirakawa T., Urushiyama D., Fukagawa S., Izuchi D., Sanui A., Kurakazu M., Miyata K., Nomiyama M., Setoue T., Nagamitsu S., Nabeshima K., Hata K., Yasunaga S., Miyamoto S.. Diagnostic Predictability of MiR-4535 and MiR-1915–5p Expression in Amniotic Fluid for Foetal Morbidity of Infection. Placenta. 2021;114:68–75. doi: 10.1016/j.placenta.2021.08.059. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  207. Waseem M., Ahmad M. K., Serajuddin M., Bhaskar V., Sankhwar S. N., Mahdi A. A.. MicroRNA-183–5p: A New Potential Marker for Prostate Cancer. Ind. J. Clin. Biochem. 2019;34(2):207–212. doi: 10.1007/s12291-017-0731-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  208. Hromadnikova I., Kotlabova K., Krofta L.. Cardiovascular Disease-Associated MicroRNA Dysregulation during the First Trimester of Gestation in Women with Chronic Hypertension and Normotensive Women Subsequently Developing Gestational Hypertension or Preeclampsia with or without Fetal Growth Restriction. Biomedicines. 2022;10(2):256. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines10020256. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  209. Sun B., Shan Z., Sun G., Wang X.. Micro-RNA-183–5p Acts as a Potential Diagnostic Biomarker for Atherosclerosis and Regulates the Growth of Vascular Smooth Muscle Cell. J. Chin. Med. Assoc. 2021;84(1):33–37. doi: 10.1097/JCMA.0000000000000433. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  210. Akbar R., Ullah K., Rahman T. U., Cheng Y., Pang H.-Y., Jin L.-Y., Wang Q.-J., Huang H.-F., Sheng J.-Z.. MiR-183–5p Regulates Uterine Receptivity and Enhances Embryo Implantation. J. Mol. Endocrinol. 2020;64(1):43–52. doi: 10.1530/JME-19-0184. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  211. Wang R., Bao H., Zhang S., Li R., Chen L., Zhu Y.. MiR-186–5p Promotes Apoptosis by Targeting IGF-1 in SH-SY5Y OGD/R Model. Int. J. Biol. Sci. 2018;14(13):1791–1799. doi: 10.7150/ijbs.25352. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  212. Huang D., Peng Y., Ma K., Deng X., Tang L., Jing D., Shao Z.. MiR-20a, a Novel Promising Biomarker to Predict Prognosis in Human Cancer: A Meta-Analysis. BMC Cancer. 2018;18(1):1189. doi: 10.1186/s12885-018-4907-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  213. Huang W., Wu X., Xiang S., Qiao M., Cen X., Pan X., Huang X., Zhao Z.. Regulatory Mechanism of MiR-20a-5p Expression in Cancer. Cell Death Discovery. 2022;8(1):262. doi: 10.1038/s41420-022-01005-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  214. Qian Y., Chu G., Zhang L., Wu Z., Wang Q., Guo J. J., Zhou F.. M2Macrophage-Derived Exosomal MiR-26b-5p Regulates Macrophage Polarization and Chondrocyte Hypertrophy by Targeting TLR3 and COL10A1 to Alleviate Osteoarthritis. J. Nanobiotechnol. 2024;22(1):72. doi: 10.1186/s12951-024-02336-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  215. Besharat Z. M., Trocchianesi S., Verrienti A., Ciampi R., Cantara S., Romei C., Sabato C., Noviello T. M. R., Po A., Citarella A., Caruso F. P., Panariello I., Gianno F., Carpino G., Gaudio E., Chiacchiarini M., Masuelli L., Sponziello M., Pecce V., Ramone T., Maino F., Dotta F., Ceccarelli M., Pezzullo L., Durante C., Castagna M. G., Elisei R., Ferretti E.. Circulating MiR-26b-5p and MiR-451a as Diagnostic Biomarkers in Medullary Thyroid Carcinoma Patients. J. Endocrinol. Invest. 2023;46(12):2583–2599. doi: 10.1007/s40618-023-02115-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  216. Kraft A., Meerang M., Kirschner M. B., Boeva V., Opitz I.. A Comparative Analysis of Secreted MiRNAs Reveals Candidate Biomarkers for Pleural Mesothelioma Detection. Br. J. Surg. 2024;111(Supplement_3):znae118.007. doi: 10.1093/bjs/znae118.007. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  217. Outeiro-Pinho G., Barros-Silva D., Aznar E., Sousa A.-I., Vieira-Coimbra M., Oliveira J., Gonçalves C. S., Costa B. M., Junker K., Henrique R., Jerónimo C.. MicroRNA-30a-5pme: A Novel Diagnostic and Prognostic Biomarker for Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma in Tissue and Urine Samples. J. Exp. Clin. Cancer Res. 2020;39(1):98. doi: 10.1186/s13046-020-01600-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  218. Ju Y., Choi G.-E., Lee M. W., Jeong M., Kwon H., Kim D. H., Kim J., Jin H., Lee K. E., Hyun K.-Y., Jang A.. Identification of MiR-143–3p as a Diagnostic Biomarker in Gastric Cancer. BMC Med. Genomics. 2023;16(1):135. doi: 10.1186/s12920-023-01554-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  219. Luizon M. R., Conceição I. M. C. A., Viana-Mattioli S., Caldeira-Dias M., Cavalli R. C., Sandrim V. C.. Circulating MicroRNAs in the Second Trimester From Pregnant Women Who Subsequently Developed Preeclampsia: Potential Candidates as Predictive Biomarkers and Pathway Analysis for Target Genes of MiR-204–5p. Front. Physiol. 2021;12:678184. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2021.678184. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  220. Ding H., Chen W., Chen X.. Serum MiR-96–5p Is a Novel and Non-Invasive Marker of Acute Myocardial Infarction Associated with Coronary Artery Disease. Bioengineered. 2022;13(2):3930–3943. doi: 10.1080/21655979.2022.2031392. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  221. Faramin Lashkarian M., Hashemipour N., Niaraki N., Soghala S., Moradi A., Sarhangi S., Hatami M., Aghaei-Zarch F., Khosravifar M., Mohammadzadeh A., Najafi S., Majidpoor J., Farnia P., Aghaei-Zarch S. M.. MicroRNA-122 in Human Cancers: From Mechanistic to Clinical Perspectives. Cancer Cell Int. 2023;23(1):29. doi: 10.1186/s12935-023-02868-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  222. Schönberger S., Mohseni M. M., Ellinger J., Tran G. V. Q., Becker M., Claviez A., Classen C.-F., Hermes B., Driever P. H., Jorch N., Lauten M., Mehlitz M., Schäfer N., Scheer-Preiss J., Schneider D. T., Troeger A., Calaminus G., Dilloo D.. MicroRNA-Profiling of MiR-371 ∼ 373- and MiR-302/367-Clusters in Serum and Cerebrospinal Fluid Identify Patients with Intracranial Germ Cell Tumors. J. Cancer Res. Clin. Oncol. 2023;149(2):791–802. doi: 10.1007/s00432-022-03915-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  223. Murray M. J., Halsall D. J., Hook C. E., Williams D. M., Nicholson J. C., Coleman N.. Identification of MicroRNAs From the MiR-371 ∼ 373 and MiR-302 Clusters as Potential Serum Biomarkers of Malignant Germ Cell Tumors. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 2011;135(1):119–125. doi: 10.1309/AJCPOE11KEYZCJHT. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  224. Devara, D. ; Sharma, B. ; Goyal, G. ; Rodarte, D. ; Kulkarni, A. ; Tinu, N. ; Pai, A. ; Kumar, S. . MiRNA-501–3p and MiRNA-502–3p: A Promising Biomarker Panel for Alzheimer’s Disease. bioRxiv 2025; preprint. 10.1101/2025.01.09.632227. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  225. Hara N., Kikuchi M., Miyashita A., Hatsuta H., Saito Y., Kasuga K., Murayama S., Ikeuchi T., Kuwano R.. Serum MicroRNA MiR-501–3p as a Potential Biomarker Related to the Progression of Alzheimer’s Disease. Acta Neuropathol. Commun. 2017;5(1):10. doi: 10.1186/s40478-017-0414-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  226. Liu Y., He H., Xiao Z.-X., Ji A., Ye J., Sun Q., Cao Y.. A Systematic Analysis of MiRNA Markers and Classification Algorithms for Forensic Body Fluid Identification. Briefings Bioinf. 2021;22(4):bbaa324. doi: 10.1093/bib/bbaa324. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  227. van der Zee Y. Y., Eijssen L. M. T., Mews P., Ramakrishnan A., Alvarez K., Lardner C. K., Cates H. M., Walker D. M., Torres-Berrío A., Browne C. J., Cunningham A., Cathomas F., Kronman H., Parise E. M., de Nijs L., Shen L., Murrough J. W., Rutten B. P. F., Nestler E. J., Issler O.. Blood MiR-144–3p: A Novel Diagnostic and Therapeutic Tool for Depression. Mol. Psychiatry. 2022;27(11):4536–4549. doi: 10.1038/s41380-022-01712-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  228. Ma J., Li D., Kong F.-F., Yang D., Yang H., Ma X.-X.. MiR-302a-5p/367–3p-HMGA2 Axis Regulates Malignant Processes during Endometrial Cancer Development. J. Exp. Clin. Cancer Res. 2018;37(1):19. doi: 10.1186/s13046-018-0686-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  229. Xia Y., Pei T., Zhao J., Wang Z., Shen Y., Yang Y., Liang J.. Long Noncoding RNA H19: Functions and Mechanisms in Regulating Programmed Cell Death in Cancer. Cell Death Discovery. 2024;10(1):76. doi: 10.1038/s41420-024-01832-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  230. Adu-Gyamfi E. A., Cheeran E. A., Salamah J., Enabulele D. B., Tahir A., Lee B.-K.. Long Non-Coding RNAs: A Summary of Their Roles in Placenta Development and Pathology. Biol. Reprod. 2024;110(3):431–449. doi: 10.1093/biolre/ioad179. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  231. Abdelazim S. A., Shaker O. G., Aly Y. A. H., Senousy M. A.. Uncovering Serum Placental-Related Non-Coding RNAs as Possible Biomarkers of Preeclampsia Risk, Onset and Severity Revealed MALAT-1, MiR-363 and MiR-17. Sci. Rep. 2022;12(1):1249. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-05119-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  232. Yang J., Qi M., Fei X., Wang X., Wang K.. Long Non-Coding RNA XIST: A Novel Oncogene in Multiple Cancers. Mol. Med. 2021;27(1):159. doi: 10.1186/s10020-021-00421-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  233. Liu M., Zhu H., Li Y., Zhuang J., Cao T., Wang Y.. Expression of Serum LncRNA-Xist in Patients with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome and Its Relationship with Pregnancy Outcome. Taiwan J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2020;59(3):372–376. doi: 10.1016/j.tjog.2020.03.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  234. Levine R. J., Maynard S. E., Qian C., Lim K.-H., England L. J., Yu K. F., Schisterman E. F., Thadhani R., Sachs B. P., Epstein F. H., Sibai B. M., Sukhatme V. P., Karumanchi S. A.. Circulating Angiogenic Factors and the Risk of Preeclampsia. N. Engl. J. Med. 2004;350(7):672–683. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa031884. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  235. Chang X., Yao J., He Q., Liu M., Duan T., Wang K.. Exosomes From Women With Preeclampsia Induced Vascular Dysfunction by Delivering SFlt (Soluble Fms-Like Tyrosine Kinase)-1 and SEng (Soluble Endoglin) to Endothelial Cells. Hypertension. 2018;72(6):1381–1390. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.118.11706. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  236. Hromadnikova I., Kotlabova K., Hympanova L., Doucha J., Krofta L.. First Trimester Screening of Circulating C19MC MicroRNAs Can Predict Subsequent Onset of Gestational Hypertension. PLoS One. 2014;9(12):e113735. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0113735. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  237. Konečná B., Tóthová L'., Repiská G.. Exosomes-Associated DNANew Marker in Pregnancy Complications? Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019;20(12):2890. doi: 10.3390/ijms20122890. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  238. Park J. Y., Lee S. W., Oh K. J., Hong J.-S.. High Mean Blood Pressure during the First Trimester Is Predictive of Future Preeclampsia Development in Healthy Pregnant Women: A Cohort Study in Korea. Clin. Exp. Obstet. Gynecol. 2019;46(5):770–775. doi: 10.12891/ceog4792.2019. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  239. Mohialdeen S. K., Aziz S. B.. Inflammatory Markers in Pre-eclampsia. Egypt. J. Chem. 2021;0(11):6523–6527. doi: 10.21608/ejchem.2021.79199.3887. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  240. Zhao X., Chen S., Zhao C., Xia F.. Maternal Immune System and State of Inflammation Dictate the Fate and Severity of Disease in Preeclampsia. J. Immunol. Res. 2021;2021:1–10. doi: 10.1155/2021/9947884. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  241. Aouache R., Biquard L., Vaiman D., Miralles F.. Oxidative Stress in Preeclampsia and Placental Diseases. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2018;19(5):1496. doi: 10.3390/ijms19051496. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  242. Socha M. W., Malinowski B., Puk O., Dubiel M., Wiciński M.. The NLRP3 Inflammasome Role in the Pathogenesis of Pregnancy Induced Hypertension and Preeclampsia. Cells. 2020;9(7):1642. doi: 10.3390/cells9071642. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  243. Martinez-Fierro M. L., Castruita-De La Rosa C., Garza-Veloz I., Cardiel-Hernandez R. M., Espinoza-Juarez M. A., Delgado-Enciso I., Castañeda-Lopez M. E., Cardenas-Vargas E., Trejo-Vázquez F., Sotelo-Ham E. I., Castañeda-Miranda R., Cid-Baez M. A., Ortiz-Rodriguez J. M., Solis-Sanchez L. O., Aviles A. G., Ortiz-Castro Y.. Early Pregnancy Protein Multiplex Screening Reflects Circulating and Urinary Divergences Associated with the Development of Preeclampsia. Hypertens. Pregnancy. 2018;37(1):37–50. doi: 10.1080/10641955.2017.1411946. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  244. Lee S. M., Kang Y., Lee E. M., Jung Y. M., Hong S., Park S. J., Park C.-W., Norwitz E. R., Lee D. Y., Park J. S.. Metabolomic Biomarkers in Midtrimester Maternal Plasma Can Accurately Predict the Development of Preeclampsia. Sci. Rep. 2020;10(1):16142. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-72852-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  245. Deng L., Huang Y., Li L., Chen H., Su J.. Serum MiR-29a/b Expression in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus and Its Influence on Prognosis Evaluation. J. Int. Med. Res. 2020;48(9):32993411. doi: 10.1177/0300060520954763. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  246. Guan C.-Y., Tian S., Cao J.-L., Wang X.-Q., Ma X., Xia H.-F.. Down-Regulated MiR-21 in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Placenta Induces PPAR-α to Inhibit Cell Proliferation and Infiltration. Diabetes Metab. Syndr. Obes. 2020;13:3009–3034. doi: 10.2147/DMSO.S253920. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  247. Wang J., Pan Y., Dai F., Wang F., Qiu H., Huang X.. Serum MiR-195-5p Is Upregulated in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. J. Clin. Lab. Anal. 2020;34(8):e23325. doi: 10.1002/jcla.23325. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  248. Fu S., Fu S., Ma X., Yang X., Ling J.. MiR-875–5p Regulates IR and Inflammation via Targeting TXNRD1 in Gestational Diabetes Rats. Mol. Med. Rep. 2021;23(5):303. doi: 10.3892/mmr.2021.11942. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  249. Sebastiani G., Guarino E., Grieco G. E., Formichi C., Delli Poggi C., Ceccarelli E., Dotta F.. Circulating MicroRNA (MiRNA) Expression Profiling in Plasma of Patients with Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Reveals Upregulation of MiRNA MiR-330–3p. Front. Endocrinol. 2017;8:345. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2017.00345. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  250. Zhou X., Xiang C., Zheng X.. MiR-132 Serves as a Diagnostic Biomarker in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus and Its Regulatory Effect on Trophoblast Cell Viability. Diagn. Pathol. 2019;14(1):119. doi: 10.1186/s13000-019-0899-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  251. Zhao C., Zhao C., Zhao H.. Defective Insulin Receptor Signaling in Patients with Gestational Diabetes Is Related to Dysregulated MiR-140 Which Can Be Improved by Naringenin. Int. J. Biochem. Cell Biol. 2020;128:105824. doi: 10.1016/j.biocel.2020.105824. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  252. Wang F., Li Z., Zhao M., Ye W., Wu H., Liao Q., Bu S., Zhang Y.. Circulating MiRNAs MiR-574–5p and MiR-3135b Are Potential Metabolic Regulators for Serum Lipids and Blood Glucose in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. Gynecol. Endocrinol. 2021;37(7):665–671. doi: 10.1080/09513590.2021.1908990. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  253. Shen H., Sun J., Liu J., Wang L., Dong L.. MiR-181d Promotes Pancreatic Beta Cell Dysfunction by Targeting IRS2 in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. Ginekol. Pol. 2021;92(8):563–570. doi: 10.5603/GP.a2021.0077. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  254. Sørensen A., van Poppel M., Desoye G., Damm P., Simmons D., Jensen D., Dalgaard L.. The Predictive Value of MiR-16, −29a and −134 for Early Identification of Gestational Diabetes: A Nested Analysis of the DALI Cohort. Cells. 2021;10(1):170. doi: 10.3390/cells10010170. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  255. Maged A. M., Moety G. A. F., Mostafa W. A., Hamed D. A.. Comparative Study between Different Biomarkers for Early Prediction of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. J. Matern.-Fetal Neonat. Med. 2014;27(11):1108–1112. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2013.850489. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  256. Jasmadi R. N., Kurniati I.. Biomarker yang Berpotensi Mendeteksi Risiko Diabetes Mellitus Gestasional pada Masa Prakonsepsi. JIMKI: J. Ilm. Mhs. Kedokt. Indones. 2020;8(1):58–63. doi: 10.53366/jimki.v8i1.38. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  257. Tenenbaum-Gavish K., Sharabi-Nov A., Binyamin D., Møller H. J., Danon D., Rothman L., Hadar E., Idelson A., Vogel I., Koren O., Nicolaides K. H., Gronbaek H., Meiri H.. First Trimester Biomarkers for Prediction of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. Placenta. 2020;101:80–89. doi: 10.1016/j.placenta.2020.08.020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  258. Hu B., Li D., Tang D., Shangguan Y., Cao Y., Guo R., Luan S., Yun C., Morgera S., Hocher B., Krämer B. K., Wang Y., Yin L., Dai Y.. Integrated Proteome and Acetylome Analyses Unveil Protein Features of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus and Preeclampsia. Proteomics. 2022;22(22):e2200124. doi: 10.1002/pmic.202200124. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  259. Liu Y., He H., Xiao Z.-X., Ji A., Ye J., Sun Q., Cao Y.. A Systematic Analysis of MiRNA Markers and Classification Algorithms for Forensic Body Fluid Identification. Briefings Bioinf. 2021;22(4):bbaa324. doi: 10.1093/bib/bbaa324. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  260. Neelima V., Bindu C.. Rate of Preeclampsia Influenced by Severity of Gestational Diabetes. Int. J. Contemp. Med. Res. 2018;5(12):1–6. doi: 10.21276/ijcmr.2018.5.12.1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  261. International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups Consensus Panel. International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups Recommendations on the Diagnosis and Classification of Hyperglycemia in Pregnancy. Diabetes Care. 2010;33(3):676–682. doi: 10.2337/dc09-1848. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  262. Hauguel-de Mouzon S., Lepercq J., Catalano P.. The Known and Unknown of Leptin in Pregnancy. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2006;194(6):1537–1545. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2005.06.064. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  263. Moutinho-Ribeiro P., Adem B., Batista I., Silva M., Silva S., Ruivo C. F., Morais R., Peixoto A., Coelho R., Costa-Moreira P., Lopes S., Vilas-Boas F., Durães C., Lopes J., Barroca H., Carneiro F., Melo S. A., Macedo G.. Exosomal Glypican-1 Discriminates Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma from Chronic Pancreatitis. Dig. Liver Dis. 2022;54(7):871–877. doi: 10.1016/j.dld.2021.10.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  264. Wang W.-J., Zhang L., Zheng T., Zhang G.-H., Du K., Yang M.-N., He H., Wang S., Wang W., Zhang J., Ouyang F., Luo Z.-C.. Fetuin-A and Fetal Growth in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. BMJ Open Diabetes Res. Care. 2020;8(1):e000864. doi: 10.1136/bmjdrc-2019-000864. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  265. Mosavat M., Mirsanjari M., Lwaleed B. A., Kamarudin M., Omar S. Z.. Adipocyte-Specific Fatty Acid-Binding Protein (AFABP) and Chemerin in Association with Gestational Diabetes: A Case-Control Study. J. Diabetes Res. 2021;2021:1–7. doi: 10.1155/2021/5533802. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  266. Siddiqui K., George T. P.. Resistin Role in Development of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. Biomark Med. 2017;11(7):579–586. doi: 10.2217/bmm-2017-0013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  267. Al-Ofi E., Alrafiah A., Maidi S., Almaghrabi S., Hakami N.. Altered Expression of Angiogenic Biomarkers in Pregnancy Associated with Gestational Diabetes. Int. J. Gen Med. 2021;Volume 14:3367–3375. doi: 10.2147/IJGM.S316670. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  268. Karami M., Mousavi S. H., Rafiee M., Heidari R., Shahrokhi S. Z.. Biochemical and Molecular Biomarkers: Unraveling Their Role in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. Diabetol. Metab. Syndr. 2023;15(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s13098-023-00980-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  269. Batiha G. E.-S., Al-kuraishy H. M., Al-Maiahy T. J., Al-Buhadily A. K., Saad H. M., Al-Gareeb A. I., Simal-Gandara J.. Plasminogen Activator Inhibitor 1 and Gestational Diabetes: The Causal Relationship. Diabetol. Metab. Syndr. 2022;14(1):127. doi: 10.1186/s13098-022-00900-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  270. Zhu J., Jiang S., Jiang X., Luo K., Huang X., Hua F.. Association Of Blood Lipocalin-2 Levels with Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Horm. Metab. Res. 2022;54(10):677–685. doi: 10.1055/a-1909-1922. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  271. Fato B. R., Beard S., Binder N. K., Pritchard N., Kaitu’u-Lino T. J., de Alwis N., Hannan N. J.. The Regulation of Endothelin-1 in Pregnancies Complicated by Gestational Diabetes: Uncovering the Vascular Effects of Insulin. Biomedicines. 2023;11(10):2660. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines11102660. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  272. Boz İ. B., Aytürk Salt S., Salt Ö., Sayın N. C., Dibirdik. İ. Association Between Plasma Asprosin Levels and Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. Diabetes, Metab. Syndr. Obes. 2023;16:2515–2521. doi: 10.2147/DMSO.S424651. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  273. Fang F., Nuyt A. M., Garofalo C., Zhang J., Julien P., Fraser W., Levy E., Luo Z.-C.. Oxidized LDL, Insulin Sensitivity and Beta-Cell Function in Newborns. BMJ Open Diabetes Res. Care. 2021;9(1):e001435. doi: 10.1136/bmjdrc-2020-001435. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering are provided here courtesy of American Chemical Society

RESOURCES