Next Article in Journal
SMURF1 Downregulation Highlights Its Potential Role in Breast Cancer
Previous Article in Journal
Temporal Transcriptomic and Metabolomic Reprogramming Unveils a Two-Phase Salt Tolerance Mechanism in Apocynum venetum
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJMS
Volume 27
Issue 4
10.3390/ijms27041918
ijms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Exosomes and Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Current Knowledge and Clinical Significance

by
Maria Loukopoulou
1,
Anastasia Kottorou
1,
Angelos Koutras
2 and
Foteinos-Ioannis Dimitrakopoulos
1,2,*
1
Molecular Oncology Laboratory, Medical School, University of Patras, 26504 Patras, Greece
2
Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, University Hospital of Patras, 26504 Patras, Greece
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2026, 27(4), 1918; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27041918
Submission received: 12 January 2026 / Revised: 7 February 2026 / Accepted: 12 February 2026 / Published: 17 February 2026
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Exosomes in the Processes of Tumorigenesis, Cancer Progression, Metastasis, and Treatment)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Exosomes, acting as vital mediators of cellular communication and carriers of diverse biomolecular cargo, are increasingly documented as important participants in cancer pathogenesis and progression. When it comes to triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), a disease that comes with significant therapeutic hurdles, finding new, non-invasive biomarkers is absolutely crucial. This systematic review considers recent research, focusing on the role of exosomal biomarkers in diagnosing, predicting prognosis and foreseeing treatment response in TNBC patients. After an extensive search across PubMed and Google Scholar, we found many exosomal molecules showing great promise for early detection, tracking disease progression and tailoring treatments. This truly highlights liquid biopsy as a valuable, minimally invasive tool. However, there are still some big challenges to treat. These include variations in methodology, the sheer diversity of samples studied and the prevalence of research in specific populations, all of which make it harder to generalize findings. It has been suggested that future research must prioritize protocol standardization, achieving a deeper understanding of underlying biological mechanisms and, crucially, developing combinatorial biomarker panels. Ultimately, the successful translation of exosomal biomarkers into clinical practice will significantly advance personalized medicine in TNBC, leading to improved patient outcomes and an enhanced quality of life.

1. Exosomes: Silent Messengers of Cellular Communication

At the heart of cellular communication and complex pathological interplays, exosomes seem to take on the role of tiny messengers capable of revolutionizing our understanding of intercellular dialogs [1]. Exosomes are nanovesicles that possess a spherical morphology, ranging between 30 and 150 nanometers, encased within a bilayer phospholipid membrane similar to typical cellular membranes [2].
Exosomes have been isolated from all body fluids (e.g., blood, plasma, cerebrospinal fluid, breast milk and even urine), making them easily accessible for clinical study [3]. In exosome research, plasma and serum are the most commonly used sources of blood-derived samples. The choice between them can have a significant impact on exosome yield, purity and the profile of molecular biomarkers [4]. Plasma is generally preferred because clotting during serum preparation activates platelets, leading to the release of additional extracellular vesicles that may contaminate the exosome fraction [5]. These differences can affect both the reproducibility and interpretation of results, emphasizing the importance of careful sample selection and standardized collection protocols, particularly when aiming for clinical applications [6].
These nanovesicles are secreted by cells dynamically and continuously under normal physiological conditions as well as when the state of a cell is compromised. This means they are uniquely capable of mirroring the state of the parent cell [7]. Through these vesicles, valuable information travels to distant cells and tissues, contributing to the organism’s homeostasis. However, when this equilibrium is disturbed, as in cancer, they can also foster pathological processes [8].
Exosomes invariably contain a remarkably complex and diverse “cargo” depending on their functional versatility (Figure 1). The categories of this cargo are mainly proteins, nucleic acids and lipids, each responsible for a specific function or set of functions [9].
The proteins inside exosomes exhibit considerable diversity. Some proteins are universal in all exosomes and function as their “identity markers,” such as tetraspanins CD9, CD63 and CD81, RAB GTPases, Alix and HSP60/90 (heat shock proteins) [10,11]. Other proteins are more specific and indicate the type of cell comprising them, such as MHC (major histocompatibility complex) Class I and II, responsible for antigen presentation [12]. Exosomes can also carry membrane-bound signaling receptors like FasL (Fas ligand) and TNFR (tumor necrosis factor receptor), which participate in cell death pathways. Other molecules include adhesion molecules like integrins, which mediate attachment to the extracellular matrix and influence cell adhesion and migration. The diverse transport and communication functions of exosomes are the result of the cooperation of glycoproteins involved in cell communication and recognition, of cytoskeletal proteins belonging to the ESCRT (Endosomal Sorting Complexes Required for Transport) system, of membrane transport and fusion proteins, of growth factors and cytokines [13,14].
Regarding nucleic acids, exosomes act as containers storing genetic information. Exosomes can carry many types of RNA, including mRNA, microRNA (miRNA), lncRNA (long non-coding RNAs), tRNA, snRNA (small nuclear RNA), snoRNA (small nucleolar RNA) and circRNA (circular RNAs) [15]. Among these, miRNAs are the most abundant in number and are essential in the regulation of gene expression that affects processes such as hematopoiesis, angiogenesis and exocytosis. The mRNAs conveyed by them are coding for protein synthesis, making exosomes a pronounced means of transferring genetic instructions to distant cells that may contribute to protein replenishment, cell differentiation, or microenvironment modification [16,17]. Moreover, exosomes also carry PIWI-interacting RNAs (piRNAs). These non-coding RNAs play a vital role in safeguarding the genome from transposable elements, thereby ensuring genetic stability and notably influencing tumor development [18,19].
Finally, the exosomal membrane bilayer is exceptionally rich in lipids, including sphingomyelin, cholesterol and ceramides. These are not just structural components; they are crucial for maintaining the exosomal structure’s stability, facilitating their secretion and ensuring the precise sorting of their internal cargo. Furthermore, they actively contribute to intercellular signaling [20].

2. Exosome Biogenesis: A Complex Cellular Process

The production of exosomes is a strictly regulated and dynamic process, guided by specific molecular pathways. Understanding the mechanisms of exosome biogenesis and their composition is of vital importance, as it illuminates their functional activities and paves the way for future clinical applications [21,22].
Exosome formation begins with endocytosis at the plasma membrane’s surface, leading to the creation of early endosomes (Figure 2) [23,24]. These early endosomes function as sorting stations for internalized cargo, maturing and transforming into late endosomes. At this stage, they form multiple inward membrane invaginations that encapsulate specific proteins, nucleic acids and other substances, thereby generating intraluminal vesicles (ILVs), the precursors of exosomes. Subsequently, late endosomes containing multiple ILVs develop into multivesicular bodies (MVBs) [25,26].
The fate of MVBs varies. While some MVBs fuse with lysosomes for the degradation of their contents, others are destined for the secretion of ILVs into the extracellular space (Figure 2) [27]. These released ILVs are then termed exosomes. The secretion of MVBs from the cell involves three key steps: targeted transport of MVBs, tethering of MVBs to the plasma membrane, and fusion of the MVB’s limiting membrane with the plasma membrane (Figure 2) [25]. The proper functioning of this entire process relies on the surface proteins of the MVB [28].
The biogenesis of ILVs and MVBs is primarily guided by two main and distinct, yet sometimes overlapping, mechanisms: the ESCRT-dependent and the ESCRT-independent pathways (Figure 2) [29].
  • ESCRT-dependent pathway: This intricate pathway is precisely orchestrated by a large multiprotein complex comprising around thirty different types of proteins. The core function of the ESCRT machinery is to selectively sort specific components into ILVs. The ESCRT system itself is made up of four main complexes—ESCRT-0, ESCRT-I, ESCRT-II and ESCRT-III—each playing a unique and vital role [30].
ESCRT-0: It is responsible for cargo aggregation in a ubiquitination-dependent process, recognizing ubiquitinated cargo proteins. It contains the HRS (Hepatocyte Growth Factor-Regulated Tyrosine Kinase Substrate) protein, which can interact with STAM.
ESCRT-I and ESCRT-II: They function synergistically to induce the encapsulation of specific molecules from the endosomal membrane through budding. HRS recruits TSG101 to ESCRT-I and then ESCRT-I recruits ESCRT-III via ESCRT-II or ALIX.
ESCRT-III: It drives vesicle scission and forms a filamentous structure that promotes the inward budding and fission of ILVs from the endosomal membrane. The ESCRT-III complex is disassembled by the VPS4 complex and is subsequently recycled.
ESCRT-associated proteins: Proteins such as ALIX and VPS4 also contribute to MVB biogenesis by regulating cargo sorting, membrane remodeling and ESCRT disassembly. The ALIX protein can interact with syndecan-syntenin and participate in regulating exosome formation [10,30,31].
b.
ESCRT-independent pathway: In addition to the ESCRT-dependent pathway, ILVs and MVBs can also be generated by ESCRT-independent mechanisms (Figure 2). These mechanisms involve lipids, such as sphingomyelin, cholesterol and ceramides, as well as tetraspanins and HSPs [26]. Exosomes are rich in these lipids, whose composition resembles that of membrane lipid rafts. Evidence suggests that lipid raft components play fundamental roles in ESCRT-independent ILV formation [26,32,33].
It is important to note that the ESCRT-dependent and ESCRT-independent pathways are not mutually exclusive. They can even operate within the same MVB, leading to the production of distinct ILV populations enriched with different cargo. This suggests that the pathways may intersect to some extent, which can depend on the cell type, its environment and its cargo [34].

3. Exosomes: Important Contributors in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Pathogenesis

Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC) is a particularly aggressive and heterogeneous subtype of breast cancer. It is characterized by the absence of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR) and HER2 expression, which drastically limits available targeted therapies [35]. This clinical challenge makes it imperative to delve deeper into the underlying molecular mechanisms of the disease, enabling the development of new, more effective therapeutic strategies [36].
In light of this imperative need, exosomes have emerged as important factors in the pathobiology of many tumor types [37,38,39], and recently, of TNBC. Through their ability to transfer a wide range of biomolecules and influence cell-to-cell signaling, they actively participate in shaping the tumor microenvironment (TME) and regulating the behavior of cancer cells at every stage of the disease [40,41].
Specifically, exosomes, through proteins and non-coding RNAs, actively contribute to tumor growth by enhancing cancer cell proliferation, inflammation and angiogenesis [42]. Exosomes play a significant role in TNBC metastasis, encompassing both local invasion and the establishment of distant metastatic niches. Exosomes promote epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT), a critical step for cancer cell invasion and dissemination [43,44]. Furthermore, by transferring biomolecules from their cells of origin, they can target specific remote tissues and create a “permissive” pre-metastatic environment, thereby facilitating the engraftment and growth of metastatic cells. A characteristic example is the involvement of exosomal integrins in predicting and shaping these metastatic sites [45,46].
Moreover, exosomes are a significant factor in the development of drug resistance, a major obstacle to effective TNBC treatment [47]. Although chemotherapy remains the primary therapeutic approach, a significant percentage of patients (approximately 70%) do not achieve a complete response and in some cases, chemotherapy-induced metastasis is even observed [48]. The development of chemoresistance by cancer cells is a complex process involving multiple mechanisms [49]. In this context, exosomes emerge as critical factors, as they actively participate in intercellular communication within the tumor microenvironment [50]. Experimental evidence shows that exosomes derived from chemoresistant breast cancer cells can transfer resistance-associated molecular cargo, including miRNAs and lncRNAs, to drug-sensitive cells, thereby modulating drug response pathways and promoting chemoresistant phenotypes in recipient cells [51,52]. Specifically, three main exosomal mechanisms contribute to increased chemotherapeutic drug efflux: the direct efflux of drugs from cells, the transfer of membrane-embedded drug efflux pumps and the transfer of drug-metabolizing enzymes, leading to their deactivation [53].

4. Exosomal Biomarkers in ΤΝBC

TNBC, as an aggressive subtype of breast cancer with limited therapeutic options, highlights the urgent need for reliable non-invasive biomarkers [54]. In this context, exosomes represent one promising approach among several emerging tools. Due to their ability to carry a dynamic cargo of biomolecules that reflects the molecular state of the tumor, they have been investigated as potential tools to support early diagnosis, provide prognostic information on disease progression and help predict treatment response, contributing decisively to personalized medicine in TNBC [55].

4.1. Exosomes as Diagnostic Biomarkers in TNBC

Early and non-invasive detection of TNBC is crucial for improving patient outcomes. Exosomes offer a unique molecular mirror of the tumor and thus, various studies have identified diverse exosomal biomolecules with diagnostic value in TNBC [56,57].

4.2. Exosomal microRNAs (miRNAs) as Diagnostic Biomarkers in TNBC

Exosomal miRNAs are key regulators of gene expression transported via exosomes, making them ideal candidates for non-invasive biomarkers [58]. Numerous studies have investigated their diagnostic value in TΝBC (Table 1a). Diverse exosomal miRNAs with a potential diagnostic role have been identified in breast cancer patients, irrespective of subtype. Specifically, the gastrointestinal system-derived miRNA (miGISig) and miR-122-5p were observed to be elevated in the plasma exosomes of patients, demonstrating effective diagnostic accuracy [59,60]. Similarly, increased levels of exosomal miR-3662, miR-146a, miR-1290, miR-200c and miR-372 were found in the serum of BC patients [61,62,63]. Exosomal miR-92b-5p in serum was observed to be elevated in BC patients compared with healthy controls and was correlated with disease stage [64], while exosomal miR-148a in serum was found to be significantly reduced in BC patients [65].
Of particular interest is miR-21, which is strongly recommended for breast cancer screening, and its diagnostic value in breast cancer has been confirmed by meta-analyses, suggesting improved accuracy through its combination with other miRNAs [66]. Indeed, miR-1246 and miR-21 were detected at significantly higher levels in the plasma exosomes of patients, with their combination serving as a superior diagnostic marker compared to their individual levels [67]. However, it is noteworthy that another study found the expression of miR-21 in urinary exosomes to be significantly lower in breast cancer patients than in controls [68]. Although both studies employed qRT-PCR for miR-21 quantification, the discrepancy in results likely arises from the different exosome sources (plasma vs. urine), underscoring the impact of sample type on exosomal biomarker levels.
Additionally, diagnostic accuracy is enhanced by the use of biomarker panels. One such panel, consisting of four urinary microRNAs (miR-424, miR-423, miR-660 and let7-i), was identified as a highly specific and sensitive tool for distinguishing breast cancer patients from healthy controls [69]. Furthermore, a panel of four exosomal miRNAs (miR-9, miR-16, miR-21 and miR-429) was found to be significantly elevated in early-stage breast cancer patients, irrespective of subtype, compared to healthy controls [70].
Beyond these general findings in breast cancer, numerous exosomal miRNAs have been specifically identified for their diagnostic role in TNBC. For instance, serum levels of sEV-miR-373 have been found significantly elevated in TNBC patients compared to other breast cancer subtypes [61]. Similarly, significantly higher levels of plasma exosomal miR-376c and miR-382 have been observed in TNBC patients relative to healthy controls [71]. A comprehensive study identified six upregulated miRNAs (hsa-miR-148a-5p, hsa-miR-200a-5p, hsa-miR-210a-3p, hsa-miR-378a-3p, hsa-miR-483-5p and hsa-miR-7110-5p) and two downregulated miRNAs (hsa-miR-92b-3p and hsa-miR-150-5p) in the plasma exosomes of TNBC patients versus healthy controls [72]. Additionally, the expression of miR-335-5p in the serum exosomes of TNBC patients has been found to be lower, while FLT1 was higher than in the control group [73]. Notably, miR-150-5p accurately distinguished Luminal A and TNBC subtypes [74]. Additionally, two exosomal oncomiRs, hsa-miR-1180 and hsa-miR-4728, were found to be significantly elevated in tumor tissue samples from TNBC patients [75]. Finally, a panel of six miRNAs (miR-21, miR-221, miR-210, miR-195, miR-145 and Let-7a) was proposed as a minimally invasive biomarker for the early detection of TNBC, with miR-21, miR-221 and miR-210 showing significant overexpression and miR-195 and miR-145 being downregulated, all correlating well with various clinicopathological and demographic factors [76].

4.3. Exosomal circRNAs and lncRNAs in Diagnosis of TNBC

CircRNAs and exosomal lncRNAs can also offer valuable information for the early diagnosis and monitoring of TNBC (Table 1b,c). The expression of circHSDL2 was significantly elevated in serum exosomes and tumor tissues of TNBC patients compared to healthy controls [77]. Concurrently, circSIPA1L3 has been recognized with high diagnostic value, showing significantly increased levels in serum exosomes of breast cancer patients more generally [78]. Correspondingly, the expression level of circSTIL in patients’ plasma exosomes showed potential diagnostic value in distinguishing TNBC from non-TNBC subtypes [79]. Furthermore, higher expression of circPSMA1 was observed in serum exosome samples from TNBC patients, as well as in TNBC cell lines, compared to non-TNBC patients and cell lines [80].
Regarding lncRNAs, lncRNA XIST in serum has emerged as a strong diagnostic indicator. Serum exo-XIST levels were capable of distinguishing TNBC patients from the healthy control group. Interestingly, these levels significantly decreased after the excision of primary breast tumors, indicating their association with tumor presence [81]. Additionally, the expression level of lncRNA SUMO1P3 in serum exosomes was significantly higher in TNBC patients compared to non-TNBC patients, patients with benign breast disease and healthy controls [82].

4.4. Exosomal Proteins as Diagnostic Biomarkers in TNBC

Exosomal protein cargo represents another promising category of biomarkers for TNBC diagnosis and several studies have highlighted the diagnostic value of some of them (Table 1d). Expression levels of the exosome tetraspanin CD151 in a serum derived from TNBC were significantly higher than those from healthy individuals [83]. Furthermore, serum exo-AnxA2 levels could serve as a suitable diagnostic tool for aggressive breast cancer, especially in TNBC patients; the concentration of exo-AnxA2 was also significantly increased in serum samples from breast cancer patients compared to healthy individuals [84]. Lastly, three exosomal membrane/surface proteins—glucose transporter 1 (GLUT-1), glypican 1 (GPC-1) and ADAM metallopeptidase domain 10 (ADAM10)—were recognized as potential breast cancer biomarkers in a study conducted on cell lines [85].
Table 1. (a) Exosomal miRNAs for diagnosis in TNBC. (b) Exosomal lncRNAs for diagnosis in TNBC. (c) Exosomal circRNAs for diagnosis in TNBC. (d) Exosomal proteins for diagnosis in TNBC.
Table 1. (a) Exosomal miRNAs for diagnosis in TNBC. (b) Exosomal lncRNAs for diagnosis in TNBC. (c) Exosomal circRNAs for diagnosis in TNBC. (d) Exosomal proteins for diagnosis in TNBC.
(a)
BiomarkerSample TypeN (Patients)/N (Controls/Others)CorrelationReference
miGISigPlasma20 BC/10 HCElevated in plasma exosomes of Chinese BC patients [59]
miR-122-5pPlasma257 BC/257 HCElevated in plasma exosomes of Chinese BC patients (38.9% TNBC)[60]
miR-3662Serum60 BC/20 HCIncreased levels in the serum of Chinese BC patients[63]
miR-146a
miR-1290
miR-200cSerum98 BC/45 benign/79 HCIncreased levels in the serum of Chinese BC patients[62]
miR-372Serum50 Invasive BC/12 HCIncreased levels in serum of German BC patients (21% TNBC)[61]
miR-92b-5pSerum59 BC/53 HCElevated in Taiwanese BC patients vs. HC; correlated with disease stage [64]
miR-148aSerum125 BC/50 benign/40 HCSignificantly reduced in Chinese BC patients [65]
miR-21
miR-1246		Plasma16 BC/16 HCSignificantly higher in plasma exosomes of American BC patients [67]
miR-21Urine22 BC/26 HCSignificantly lower in Japanese BC patients than in controls [68]
miR-424Urine69 BC/40 HCHighly specific/sensitive tool for distinguishing BC from HC in German patients (16 TNBC/69)[69]
miR-423
miR-660
let-7i
miR-9Plasma62 BC/20 HCSignificantly elevated in early-stage South Korean BC patients (15/62)[70]
miR-16
miR-21
miR-429
miR-373Serum168 primary BC/19 benign/28 HCSignificantly elevated in German TNBC patients vs. other BC subtypes[61]
miR-376cSerum224 TNBC/20 HCElevated in German TNBC patients relative to healthy controls[71]
miR-382
hsa-miR-148a-5pPlasma27 BC/3 HCUpregulated in Chinese TNBC patients vs. HC[72]
hsa-miR-200a-5p
hsa-miR-210a-3p
hsa-miR-378a-3p
hsa-miR-483-5p
hsa-miR-7110-5p
hsa-miR-92b-3pDownregulated in Chinese TNBC patients vs. HC
hsa-miR-150-5p
miR-335-5pSerum56 TNBC/HC not specifiedLower expression in Chinese TNBC patients than in HC[73]
miR-150-5pSerum31 BC (16 LA. 15 TNBC)/16 HCAccurately distinguished LA and TNBC subtypes in Brazilians[74]
hsa-miR-1180Tumor Tissue15 TNBC tumor/15 adjacent normalSignificantly elevated in Indian TNBC tumor tissue[75]
hsa-miR-4728
miR-21
miR-221
miR-210		Serum 85 TNBC/85 HCOverexpressed in Indians TNBC patients; early detection biomarker[76]
Tissue85 TNBC/85 adjacent normal
miR-195
miR-145
Let-7a		Serum85 TNBC/85 HCDownregulated in Indians TNBC patients; early detection biomarker
Tissue85 TNBC/85 adjacent normalOverexpressed in Indians TNBC patients; early detection biomarker
(b)
BiomarkerSample TypeN (Patients)/N (Controls/Others)CorrelationReference
lncRNA XISTSerum91 TNBC/50 HCDistinguishes TNBC patients from HC in Chinese; decreased after tumor excision[81]
SUMO1P3Serum130 TNBC/60 non-TNBC/60 benign/50 HCHigher in Chinese TNBC patients compared to non-TNBC, benign and HC[82]
(c)
BiomarkerSample TypeN (Patients)/N
(Controls/Others)		Correlation/FindingReference
circHSDL2Serum Exosomes and Tumor Tissue43 TNBC (serum)/Not specified HC (serum)/20 TNBC tumorSignificantly elevated in serum exosomes and tumor tissues of TNBC patients vs. HC[80]
circSIPA1L3Serum50 BC/50 HCSignificantly increased levels in the serum exosomes of Chinese BC patients [78]
circSTILPlasma59 TNBC/40 non-TNBCDiagnostic value in distinguishing TNBC from non-TNBC subtypes in Chinese[79]
circPSMA1Serum and Cell Lines20 TNBC/20 non-TNBCIncreased expression in Chinese TNBC patients and TNBC cell lines vs. Non-TNBC patients/lines[77]
(d)
BiomarkerSample TypeN (Patients)/N
(Controls/Others)		CorrelationReference
CD151Serum10 TNBC/17 HCHigher expression in Chinese TNBC patients than in HC[83]
exo-AnxA2Serum169 BC/68 HC Concentration significantly increased in serum samples from American BC patients vs. HC[84]
FLT1Serum56 TNBC/Not specified HCHigher expression in Chinese TNBC patients than in HC[73]
GLUT-1BC Cell Line and non-tumorigenic breast cell line Increased expression in BC cell lines[85]
GPC-1
ADAM10
Abbreviations: BC: breast cancer, HC: healthy control, TNBC: triple-negative breast cancer.

5. Exosomes as Prognostic Indicators in TNBC

Beyond their diagnostic role, exosomes are emerging as reliable prognostic indicators in TNBC. Their study allows for the prediction of recurrence, disease progression, the occurrence of metastases and estimates patients’ overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).

5.1. Exosomal miRNAs as Prognostic Indicators in TNBC

Decreased expression of exosomal miR-148a in serum and exosomal miGISig in plasma has been closely linked to an unfavorable clinical outcome in breast cancer patients (Table 2a) [59,65]. Conversely, high expression of a panel of four miRNAs—miR-4448, miR-2392, miR-2467 and miR-4800—in serum was associated with longer OS (overall survival) in TNBC patients [86]. Εxosomal miRNA-21 and miR-105 expression levels in serum were higher in metastatic BC patients compared to non-metastatic patients and healthy controls [87].
Furthermore, the expression of miR-335-5p in serum exosomes was related to histological grade, differentiation degree and lymph node metastasis. Specifically, low expression of miR-335-5p was associated with significantly shorter OS in TNBC patients, while high expression of its target gene, FLT1, was linked to a lower survival rate [73]. Additionally, high expression of Akt1 combined with low expression of mir-637 in serum exosomes was strongly correlated with poor prognosis in TNBC patients with lymph node metastasis [80]. Finally, miR-939 in tissue exosomes emerged as a prognostic factor for DFS, particularly in combination with lymph node involvement (N), multifocal occurrence and tumor size, suggesting a synergistic risk of recurrence in patients with high miR-939 expression and lymph node involvement [88].

5.2. Exosomal lncRNAs and circRNAs as Prognostic Indicators in TNBC

Several studies have associated the increased expression of specific circRNAs with an unfavorable prognosis and more aggressive TNBC behavior (Table 2c). Specifically, the increased expression of exosomal circSIPA1L3 in serum was associated with shorter OS in BC patients [78]. Similarly, high expression levels of exosomal circSTIL in plasma were correlated with worse DFS in TNBC patients, although no association with OS was found [89]. Furthermore, exosomal circHSDL2 in the serum of TNBC patients appeared to promote proliferation, infiltration and metastasis in TNBC cells, while the increased expression of exosomal circMIB1, derived from CAFs (cancer-associated fibroblasts), was significantly associated with shorter OS and DFS in TNBC patients [77,90].
Another significant prognostic biomarker is the exosomal lncRNA XIST, whose expression levels have been shown to be significantly higher in patients with recurrent TNBC compared to those with non-recurrent TNBC (Table 2b). High expression of exo-XIST in serum was associated with worse OS, while its expression significantly decreased after primary tumor excision and increased after recurrence, indicating that exo-XIST can serve as a non-invasive biomarker for predicting the progression of TNBC patients [81].
Additionally, lncRNA SUMO1P3 in serum exosomes was closely associated with vascular/lymphatic invasion, lymph node metastasis and histological grade. Patients with high levels of lncRNA SUMO1P3 in serum exosomes had worse OS compared to those with low levels [82]. Similarly, exosomal lncRNA LINC00989 in serum was significantly elevated in patients with metastatic TNBC [91]. Higher levels of this biomarker, often in combination with clinical markers such as CEA and CA125, were significantly associated with shorter OS and PFS, establishing it as an independent prognostic factor [91]. Finally, LINC00899 was found to be reduced in plasma exosomes and breast cancer cell lines, correlating with the Ki-67 index, tumor size and the presence or absence of lymph node metastasis [89].

5.3. Exosomal Proteins as Prognostic Indicators in TNBC

Additionally, the level of exosomal LDHC (Lactate Dehydrogenase C) in the serum of preoperative breast cancer patients was significantly higher than in postoperative patients (Table 2d). Furthermore, in patients with recurrent disease, the level of exosomal LDHC was elevated, suggesting that exosomal LDHC in serum could be a promising indicator for effective monitoring and prediction of breast cancer recurrence [92]. The exosomal protein AnxA2 (exo-AnxA2) has shown significant prognostic value. Exo-AnxA2 levels were significantly higher in serum samples from TNBC patients with grade III compared to grade II patients. Breast cancer patients with high exo-AnxA2 levels in serum had significantly shorter OS and worse DFS. Moreover, the association of exo-AnxA2 with African American TNBC patients suggests its potential role as a factor contributing to TNBC aggressiveness in these women [84]. Finally, one study showed that high levels of the exosomal proteins EV_APRIL, EV_CXCL13 and EV_VEGF-A in the serum of TNBC patients were associated with significantly shorter OS. Multi-parametric analysis even identified the high level of EV_CXCL13 as an independent prognostic factor for poor OS [93].
Table 2. (a) Exosomal miRNAs for prognosis in TNBC. (b) Exosomal lncRNAs for prognosis in TNBC. (c) Exosomal circRNAs as prognostic Biomarkers in TNBC. (d) Exosomal proteins as prognostic Biomarkers in TNBC.
Table 2. (a) Exosomal miRNAs for prognosis in TNBC. (b) Exosomal lncRNAs for prognosis in TNBC. (c) Exosomal circRNAs as prognostic Biomarkers in TNBC. (d) Exosomal proteins as prognostic Biomarkers in TNBC.
(a)
BiomarkerSample TypeN (Patients)/N (Controls/Others)CorrelationReference
miR-148aSerum125 BC and 50 benign/40 HCLower expression in Chinese BC patients linked to worse OS and DFS[65]
miGISigPlasma210Higher expression in Chinese BC patients linked to worse OS[59]
miR-4448Serum24 TNBC High expression associated with longer OS in Japanese TNBC patients[86]
miR-2392
miR-2467
miR-4800
miR-21serum53 BCHigher expression in metastatic Spanish BC patients[87]
miR-105
miR-335-5pSerum56 TNBC Low expression associated with worse OS in Chinese TNBC patients[73]
miR-637Serum20 TNBC Low expression (combined with high Akt1) correlated with poor prognosis in Chinese TNBC patients with lymph node metastasis[80]
miR-939Tissue63 TNBC High expression associated with recurrence risk in Italian breast cancer patients[88]
(b)
BiomarkerSample TypeN (Patients)/N (Controls/Others)CorrelationReference
XISTSerum91 TNBCHigh expression associated with worse OS in Chinese TNBC patients[81]
SUMO1P3Serum130 TNBCHigh expression associated with worse OS in Chinese TNBC patients[82]
LINC00989Serum135 TNBCElevated in metastatic TNBC; combination with CEA, CA125 associated with shorter OS and PFS in Chinese TNBC patients[91]
LINC00899Plasma 119 BCCorrelated with Ki-67 index, tumor size and presence/absence of lymph node metastasis[89]
(c)
BiomarkerSample TypeN (Patients)/N (Controls/Others)CorrelationReference
circSIPA1L3serum238 BC Increased levels associated with shorter OS in Chinese BC patients.[78]
circSTILplasma49 TNBCHigh expression associated with worse DFS in Chinese TNBC patients.[79]
circHSDL2serum43 TNBCPromotes proliferation, infiltration and metastasis in TNBC cells.[77]
circMIB1exosomes from CAFs113 TNBC Increased expression associated with shorter OS and DFS in Chinese TNBC patients.[90]
(d)
BiomarkerSample TypeN (Patients)/N (Controls/Others)CorrelationReference
FLT1serum56 TNBC High expression associated with worse OS in Chinese TNBC patients.[73]
Akt1serum20 TNBC High expression of Akt1 combined with low expression of miR-637 correlated with poor prognosis in Chinese TNBC patients with lymph node metastasis.[80]
LDHCserum75 BC Higher levels in Chinese preoperative breast cancer patients than in postoperative patients. [92]
AnxA2serum169 TNBC Higher levels associated with shorter OS and worse DFS in Americans and higher levels in TNBC patients with Grade III compared to Grade II.[84]
EV_APRILserum190 TNBC Higher levels in Korean TNBC patients associated with shorter OS.[93]
EV_CXCL13
EV_VEGF-A
Abbreviations: BC: breast cancer, HC: healthy control, TNBC: triple-negative breast cancer, DFS: disease-free survival, OS: overall survival, CAF: cancer-associated fibroblasts.

6. Exosomal Biomarkers as Predictive Indicators in TNBC

Beyond their diagnostic and prognostic roles, exosomes and their biomolecular content may also serve as predictive biomarkers in TNBC. Their ability to dynamically reflect tumor response to various therapeutic approaches, such as chemotherapy and immunotherapy, offers an invaluable tool for treatment individualization. By studying exosomes, researchers aim to identify patients more likely to respond to specific therapies, enable early recognition of treatment resistance and monitor minimal residual disease, ultimately leading to more effective and targeted interventions [94].

6.1. Overall Exosome Concentration and Treatment Response

The overall concentration of extracellular vesicles (EVs) in plasma, among which exosomes are particularly critical, has emerged as a significant predictive indicator for the response of BC patients to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). More specifically, one study showed that EV concentration was 40 times higher in BC patients compared to healthy controls, and that an increase in its concentration after NACT was associated with treatment failure, reduced three-year DFS, and OS. Consequently, this study suggests that plasma EV concentration in BC patients may reflect the status of minimal residual disease (MRD), as well as treatment response [95].

6.2. Exosomal RNA as Predictive Indicators for Chemotherapy Response

At the level of lncRNAs, SUMO1P3 levels in serum exosomes significantly decreased in cases of chemosensitivity, while remaining unchanged in cases of chemoresistance in TNBC patients (Table 3a) [82]. Correspondingly, LINC00899 in plasma exosomes demonstrated high predictive value for pathological outcome in TNBC patients receiving neoadjuvant treatment, indicating its potential to predict chemotherapy efficacy [89]. Similarly, the expression of circSTIL from plasma exosomes significantly increased in TNBC patients without NAC compared to patients who received NAC [79].
Regarding miRNAs, several have emerged as predictive indicators for response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). Specifically, the expression of miR-4448 and miR-2392 in serum was significantly higher in patients with pathological complete response (pCR) compared to those with non-pCR. A combined model of these two miRNAs, along with miR-2467-3p and miR-4800-3p, is reported to accurately distinguish between pCR and non-pCR patients in TNBC [86]. Likewise, the upregulation of plasma miR-127 was associated with pCR in BC. While after the first dose of NACT, high expression of miR-141 in plasma was associated with pCR, miR-34a, exo-miR182 and exo-miR-183 predicted non-pCR [96].
Furthermore, the plasma exosomal expression levels of miR-185, miR-4283, miR-5008 and miR-3613 were found to be lower in TNBC patients with no NACT response, whereas miR-1302, miR-4715 and miR-3144 were higher [97]. MiR-770 was highly expressed in chemosensitive tissues and predicted a better prognosis for TNBC, indicating its significant role in regulating chemoresistance and disease progression [98]. Additionally, hsa-miR-6831-5p in serum showed a significant difference in expression between responding and drug-resistant patients to AC-sequential T2 chemotherapy, indicating its potential as a chemosensitivity marker [99]. Finally, during neoadjuvant therapy, miRNA-21 levels in the serum of BC patients were directly correlated with tumor size and inversely with Ki67 expression [87].

6.3. Exosomal Proteins as Predictive Indicators for Chemotherapy Response

Regarding exosomal proteins, exosomal ANXA6 levels at baseline were lower in highly sensitive TNBC patients than in resistant TNBC patients when they received gemcitabine-based first-line chemotherapy (Table 3b). This suggests that serum exosomal ANXA6 levels in TNBC patients could be predictive of the response to gemcitabine-based chemotherapy [100].

6.4. Exosomal Biomarkers as Predictive Indicators for Immunotherapy Response

Immunotherapy is an emerging therapeutic approach in TNBC and exosomes may be able to predict response to it. Specifically, exosomal PD-L1 has emerged as a significant predictive biomarker (Table 3c). Raimondi et al. have reported that patients treated with atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel have a significantly higher number of exosomal PD-L1 mRNA copies per mL at baseline in the case of complete or partial response compared to those with stable or progressive disease [101]. This finding aligns with another study, which demonstrated that plasma exosomes enriched with PD-L1 could serve as a favorable and predictive biomarker for immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) therapies in metastatic TNBC [102].
However, the first study adds a dynamic dimension, showing that an increase in PD-L1 mRNA copies per mL after treatment was associated with significantly shorter progression-free survival and OS. This suggests that while high initial expression may be favorable for response, an increase during or after treatment might indicate the development of resistance or more aggressive disease [101]. Consequently, exosomal PD-L1 seems to be associated with treatment outcome and response to immunotherapy.
The current standard for guiding immunotherapy decisions in TNBC is tissue PD-L1 expression, which, however, has inherent limitations: it reflects expression only at the site and time of the biopsy and may not capture the spatial heterogeneity of tumors [103,104]. In contrast, exosomal PD-L1 in plasma offers a non-invasive, dynamic alternative. It allows for repeated sampling, reflects PD-L1 from multiple tumor sites, and may provide earlier insights into treatment response or the emergence of resistance [105,106]. By complementing tissue-based analyses, exosomal PD-L1 has the potential to enhance predictive accuracy for immunotherapy, although further studies are needed to determine optimal measurement methods and validate its utility across diverse patient populations [107].

7. Conclusions and Future Perspectives

Τhis review highlights the multifaceted role of exosomes as promising biomarkers in TNBC. Due to the heterogeneity, aggressive nature and lack of targeted therapies for this particular disease, the need for novel, non-invasive biomarkers is escalating [108]. Diverse RNA molecules (such as miRNAs, lncRNAs, circRNAs) as well as proteins within exosomes have been studied for their role in the early diagnosis of TNBC, the prediction of disease progression and the response to therapies. In addition, exosomes offer a minimally invasive and dynamic method for disease monitoring [109]. However, the integration of exosomal biomarkers into clinical practice faces significant challenges and limitations. Initially, a notable heterogeneity has been observed across studies, both regarding exosome isolation and analysis methodologies, the different types of biological materials (e.g., serum, plasma, urine, etc.) and the size and populations of the samples. The lack of standardization in these techniques can impact the reproducibility of results. It is also important to note that various studies quantify exosomal RNAs using different methodologies, most commonly RT-qPCR, but also next-generation sequencing (NGS) or RNA in situ hybridization (RNA-ISH). For reliable comparison of results across studies in the future, RNA levels should ideally be measured using the same technique. Moreover, an additional methodological challenge lies in the incomplete separation of exosomes from other extracellular vesicle subtypes, such as microvesicles, as well as from protein aggregates and lipoprotein particles, which often co-isolate using commonly applied techniques [110]. This overlap can affect the molecular composition detected in exosomal preparations and may partly explain the variability reported between studies, highlighting the importance of cautious interpretation of methodological differences. Furthermore, the complexity of exosomal biomarkers and their intricate networks necessitates a deeper understanding of the biological mechanisms governing their function in TNBC. Finally, the majority of studies to date concern Asian populations (primarily Chinese and Japanese), a fact that limits the generalizability of results and necessitates the performance of multi-center studies in diverse ethnic groups.
Despite these challenges, future prospects for the clinical application of exosomal biomarkers in TNBC are particularly encouraging. The next steps in research should focus on developing standardized exosome isolation and analysis protocols, as well as highly accurate and sensitive diagnostic/prognostic kits [111]. Understanding the underlying biological mechanisms through which exosomes influence TNBC development, progression, metastasis and treatment response is crucial for developing targeted interventions [112]. Additionally, research is moving towards the utilization of panels of combinatorial biomarkers over individual ones to offer greater diagnostic and prognostic accuracy [94]. Ultimately, the utilization of exosomal biomarkers will significantly contribute to achieving personalized medicine for TNBC patients, enabling early diagnosis, more accurate prognosis and more effective treatment guidance, thereby improving clinical outcomes and patient quality of life [55].

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, F.-I.D.; methodology, F.-I.D. and M.L.; formal analysis, F.-I.D., M.L. and A.K. (Anastasia Kottorou); investigation, F.-I.D., M.L.; resources, F.-I.D. and M.L.; data curation, M.L.; writing—original draft preparation, M.L.; writing—review and editing, F.-I.D.; visualization, M.L.; supervision, F.-I.D. and A.K. (Angelos Koutras). All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Tkach, M.; Théry, C. Communication by Extracellular Vesicles: Where We Are and Where We Need to Go. Cell 2016, 164, 1226–1232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Raposo, G.; Stoorvogel, W. Extracellular vesicles: Exosomes, microvesicles, and friends. J. Cell Biol. 2013, 200, 373–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. de la Torre Gomez, C.; Goreham, R.V.; Bech Serra, J.J.; Nann, T.; Kussmann, M. “Exosomics”—A Review of Biophysics, Biology and Biochemistry of Exosomes with a Focus on Human Breast Milk. Front. Genet. 2018, 9, 92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Taha, H.B. Plasma versus serum for extracellular vesicle (EV) isolation: A duel for reproducibility and accuracy for CNS-originating EVs biomarker analysis. J. Neurosci. Res. 2023, 101, 1677–1686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Zhang, X.; Takeuchi, T.; Takeda, A.; Mochizuki, H.; Nagai, Y. Comparison of serum and plasma as a source of blood extracellular vesicles: Increased levels of platelet-derived particles in serum extracellular vesicle fractions alter content profiles from plasma extracellular vesicle fractions. PLoS ONE 2022, 17, e0270634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Sánchez-Vizcaíno Mengual, E.; Cordero, L.; Pinto, H. Human Blood Exosomes: Isolation and Characterization Methods, Variability, and the Need for Standardized Protocols—A Review. Biomedicines 2025, 13, 2970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Mukerjee, N.; Bhattacharya, A.; Maitra, S.; Kaur, M.; Ganesan, S.; Mishra, S.; Ashraf, A.; Rizwan, M.; Kesari, K.K.; Tabish, T.; et al. Exosome isolation and characterization for advanced diagnostic and therapeutic applications. Mater. Today Bio 2025, 31, 101613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Corrado, C.; Raimondo, S.; Chiesi, A.; Ciccia, F.; De Leo, G.; Alessandro, R. Exosomes as Intercellular Signaling Organelles Involved in Health and Disease: Basic Science and Clinical Applications. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2013, 14, 5338–5366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Jeppesen, D.K.; Fenix, A.M.; Franklin, J.L.; Higginbotham, J.N.; Zhang, Q.; Zimmerman, L.J.; Liebler, D.C.; Ping, J.; Liu, Q.; Evans, R.; et al. Reassessment of Exosome Composition. Cell 2019, 177, 428–445.e18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Kowal, J.; Tkach, M.; Théry, C. Biogenesis and secretion of exosomes. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2014, 29, 116–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Jankovičová, J.; Sečová, P.; Michalková, K.; Antalíková, J. Tetraspanins, More than Markers of Extracellular Vesicles in Reproduction. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 7568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Uddin, M.J.; Mohite, P.; Munde, S.; Ade, N.; Oladosu, T.A.; Chidrawar, V.R.; Patel, R.; Bhattacharya, S.; Paliwal, H.; Singh, S. Extracellular vesicles: The future of therapeutics and drug delivery systems. Intell. Pharm. 2024, 2, 312–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Hánělová, K.; Raudenská, M.; Masařík, M.; Balvan, J. Protein cargo in extracellular vesicles as the key mediator in the progression of cancer. Cell Commun. Signal. 2024, 22, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. 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, 1205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Liu, J.; Ren, L.; Li, S.; Li, W.; Zheng, X.; Yang, Y.; Fu, W.; Yi, J.; Wang, J.; Du, G. The biology, function, and applications of exosomes in cancer. Acta Pharm. Sin. B 2021, 11, 2783–2797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. O’Brien, J.; Hayder, H.; Zayed, Y.; Peng, C. Overview of MicroRNA Biogenesis, Mechanisms of Actions, and Circulation. Front. Endocrinol. 2018, 9, 402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Kumar, M.A.; Baba, S.K.; Sadida, H.Q.; Marzooqi, S.A.; Jerobin, J.; Altemani, F.H.; Algehainy, N.; Alanazi, M.A.; Abou-Samra, A.-B.; Kumar, R.; et al. Extracellular vesicles as tools and targets in therapy for diseases. Signal Transduct. Target. Ther. 2024, 9, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Iwasaki, Y.W.; Siomi, M.C.; Siomi, H. PIWI-Interacting RNA: Its Biogenesis and Functions. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 2015, 84, 405–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Chen, Y.F.; Luh, F.; Ho, Y.S.; Yen, Y. Exosomes: A review of biologic function, diagnostic and targeted therapy applications, and clinical trials. J. Biomed. Sci. 2024, 31, 67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Donoso-Quezada, J.; Ayala-Mar, S.; González-Valdez, J. The role of lipids in exosome biology and intercellular communication: Function, analytics and applications. Traffic 2021, 22, 204–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Parameshwar, K.; Anitha, K.; Mounika, N.; Parameshwar, R.; Narayana, N.A. Exosomes: Biogenesis, Composition, and Synthesis. In Exosomes Based Drug Delivery Strategies for Brain Disorders; Springer Nature: Singapore, 2024; pp. 37–53. [Google Scholar]
  22. Li, J.; Wang, J.; Chen, Z. Emerging role of exosomes in cancer therapy: Progress and challenges. Mol. Cancer 2025, 24, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Wang, Y.; Xiao, T.; Zhao, C.; Li, G. The Regulation of Exosome Generation and Function in Physiological and Pathological Processes. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 25, 255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Cano, A.; Ettcheto, M.; Bernuz, M.; Puerta, R.; Esteban de Antonio, E.; Sánchez-López, E.; Souto, E.B.; Camins, A.; Marti, M.; Pividori, M.I.; et al. Extracellular vesicles, the emerging mirrors of brain physiopathology. Int. J. Biol. Sci. 2023, 19, 721–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Xu, M.; Ji, J.; Jin, D.; Wu, Y.; Wu, T.; Lin, R.; Zhu, S.; Jiang, F.; Ji, Y.; Bao, B.; et al. The biogenesis and secretion of exosomes and multivesicular bodies (MVBs): Intercellular shuttles and implications in human diseases. Genes Dis. 2023, 10, 1894–1907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Gurung, S.; Perocheau, D.; Touramanidou, L.; Baruteau, J. The exosome journey: From biogenesis to uptake and intracellular signalling. Cell Commun. Signal. 2021, 19, 47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Krylova, S.V.; Feng, D. The Machinery of Exosomes: Biogenesis, Release, and Uptake. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 1337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. 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, 877–889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Babst, M. MVB vesicle formation: ESCRT-dependent, ESCRT-independent and everything in between. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2011, 23, 452–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Schmidt, O.; Teis, D. The ESCRT machinery. Curr. Biol. 2012, 22, R116–R120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Larios, J.; Mercier, V.; Roux, A.; Gruenberg, J. ALIX- and ESCRT-III–dependent sorting of tetraspanins to exosomes. J. Cell Biol. 2020, 219, e201904113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Han, Q.F.; Li, W.J.; Hu, K.S.; Gao, J.; Zhai, W.L.; Yang, J.H.; Zhang, S.J. Exosome biogenesis: Machinery, regulation, and therapeutic implications in cancer. Mol. Cancer 2022, 21, 207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Teng, F.; Fussenegger, M. Shedding Light on Extracellular Vesicle Biogenesis and Bioengineering. Adv. Sci. 2021, 8, 2003505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Komori, T.; Fukuda, M. Two roads diverged in a cell: Insights from differential exosome regulation in polarized cells. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2024, 12, 1451988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Foulkes, W.D.; Smith, I.E.; Reis-Filho, J.S. Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2010, 363, 1938–1948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Zhang, Z.; Zhang, R.; Li, D. Molecular Biology Mechanisms and Emerging Therapeutics of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. Biologics 2023, 17, 113–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Papakonstantinou, D.; Roumeliotou, A.; Pantazaka, E.; Shaukat, A.; Christopoulou, A.; Koutras, A.; Dimitrakopoulos, F.I.; Georgoulias, V.; Xagara, A.; Chantzara, E.; et al. Integrative analysis of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and exosomes from small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients: A comprehensive approach. Mol. Oncol. 2025, 19, 2038–2055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Dimitrakopoulos, F.I.; Kottorou, A.E.; Rodgers, K.; Sherwood, J.T.; Koliou, G.A.; Lee, B.; Yang, A.; Brahmer, J.R.; Baylin, S.B.; Yang, S.C.; et al. Clinical Significance of Plasma CD9-Positive Exosomes in HIV Seronegative and Seropositive Lung Cancer Patients. Cancers 2021, 13, 5193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Kottorou, A.; Dimitrakopoulos, F.I.; Diamantopoulou, G.; Kalofonou, F.; Stavropoulos, M.; Thomopoulos, K.; Makatsoris, T.; Koutras, A.; Kalofonos, A. Small Extracellular Vesicles (sEVs) Biogenesis Molecular Players Are Associated with Clinical Outcome of Colorectal Cancer Patients. Cancers 2023, 15, 1685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Semeradtova, A.; Liegertova, M.; Herma, R.; Capkova, M.; Brignole, C.; Del Zotto, G. Extracellular vesicles in cancer’s communication: Messages we can read and how to answer. Mol. Cancer 2025, 24, 86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Weaver, J.W.; Zhang, J.; Rojas, J.; Musich, P.R.; Yao, Z.; Jiang, Y. The application of exosomes in the treatment of triple-negative breast cancer. Front. Mol. Biosci. 2022, 9, 1022725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Duan, S.L.; Fu, W.J.; Jiang, Y.K.; Peng, L.S.; Ousmane, D.; Zhang, Z.J.; Wang, J.-P. Emerging role of exosome-derived non-coding RNAs in tumor-associated angiogenesis of tumor microenvironment. Front. Mol. Biosci. 2023, 10, 1220193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Ashekyan, O.; Abdallah, S.; Shoukari, A.A.; Chamandi, G.; Choubassy, H.; Itani, A.R.S.; Alwan, N.; Nasr, R. Spotlight on Exosomal Non-Coding RNAs in Breast Cancer: An In Silico Analysis to Identify Potential lncRNA/circRNA-miRNA-Target Axis. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 8351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Cao, J.; Feng, B.; Xv, Y.; Yu, J.; Cao, S.; Ma, C. Continued attention: The role of exosomal long non-coding RNAs in tumors over the past three years. Int. Immunopharmacol. 2025, 144, 113666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Yang, X.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, S.; Qiu, L.; Zhuang, Z.; Wei, M.; Deng, X.; Wang, Z.; Han, J. The Key Role of Exosomes on the Pre-metastatic Niche Formation in Tumors. Front. Mol. Biosci. 2021, 8, 703640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Asao, T.; Tobias, G.C.; Lucotti, S.; Jones, D.R.; Matei, I.; Lyden, D. Extracellular vesicles and particles as mediators of long-range communication in cancer: Connecting biological function to clinical applications. Extracell. Vesicles Circ. Nucleic Acids 2023, 4, 461–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Liu, L.; Jiang, D.; Bai, S.; Zhang, X.; Kang, Y. Research progress of exosomes in drug resistance of breast cancer. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2024, 11, 1214648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Liao, X.W.; Gao, J.B.; Sun, H.; Chen, H.D.; Zheng, M.H.; Han, L.; Chen, X.-G.; Su, Y.-N.; Pan, D.-L.; Wu, M.; et al. Prediction of neoadjuvant chemotherapy efficacy and prognostic biomarker analysis in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. Front. Pharmacol. 2025, 16, 1553831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Mansoori, B.; Mohammadi, A.; Davudian, S.; Shirjang, S.; Baradaran, B. The Different Mechanisms of Cancer Drug Resistance: A Brief Review. Adv. Pharm. Bull. 2017, 7, 339–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Li, J.; Gao, N.; Gao, Z.; Liu, W.; Pang, B.; Dong, X.; Li, Y.; Fan, T. The Emerging Role of Exosomes in Cancer Chemoresistance. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2021, 9, 737962. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Santos, J.C.; da Silva Lima, N.; Sarian, L.O.; Matheu, A.; Ribeiro, M.L.; Derchain, S.F.M. Exosome-mediated breast cancer chemoresistance via miR-155 transfer. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Li, J.; Kang, J.; Liu, W.; Liu, J.; Pan, G.; Mao, A.; Zhang, Q.; Lu, J.; Ding, J.; Li, H. Docetaxel-resistant triple-negative breast cancer cell-derived exosomal lncRNA LINC00667 reduces the chemosensitivity of breast cancer cells to docetaxel via targeting miR-200b-3p/Bcl-2 axis. Eur. J. Histochem. 2022, 66, 3529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Dong, X.; Bai, X.; Ni, J.; Zhang, H.; Duan, W.; Graham, P.; Li, Y. Exosomes and breast cancer drug resistance. Cell Death Dis. 2020, 11, 987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Xiong, N.; Wu, H.; Yu, Z. Advancements and challenges in triple-negative breast cancer: A comprehensive review of therapeutic and diagnostic strategies. Front. Oncol. 2024, 14, 1405491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Youssef, E.; Palmer, D.; Fletcher, B.; Vaughn, R. Exosomes in Precision Oncology: From Bench to Bedside in Diagnostics and Therapeutics. Cancers 2025, 17, 940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Dong, M.; Liu, Q.; Xu, Y.; Zhang, Q. Extracellular Vesicles: The Landscape in the Progression, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2022, 10, 842898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Li, J.; Wang, A.; Guo, H.; Zheng, W.; Chen, R.; Miao, C.; Zheng, D.; Peng, J.; Wang, J.; Chen, Z. Exosomes: Innovative biomarkers leading the charge in non-invasive cancer diagnostics. Theranostics 2025, 15, 5277–5311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Li, C.; Zhou, T.; Chen, J.; Li, R.; Chen, H.; Luo, S.; Chen, D.; Cai, C.; Li, W. The role of Exosomal miRNAs in cancer. J. Transl. Med. 2022, 20, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Bao, S.; Hu, T.; Liu, J.; Su, J.; Sun, J.; Ming, Y.; Li, J.; Wu, N.; Chen, H.; Zhou, M. Genomic instability-derived plasma extracellular vesicle-microRNA signature as a minimally invasive predictor of risk and unfavorable prognosis in breast cancer. J. Nanobiotechnol. 2021, 19, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Li, M.; Zou, X.; Xia, T.; Wang, T.; Liu, P.; Zhou, X.; Wang, S.; Zhu, W. A five-miRNA panel in plasma was identified for breast cancer diagnosis. Cancer Med. 2019, 8, 7006–7017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Eichelser, C.; Stückrath, I.; Müller, V.; Milde-Langosch, K.; Wikman, H.; Pantel, K.; Schwarzenbach, H. Increased serum levels of circulating exosomal microRNA-373 in receptor-negative breast cancer patients. Oncotarget 2014, 5, 9650–9663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Qiao, P.; Du, H.; Guo, X.; Yu, M.; Zhang, C.; Shi, Y. Serum exosomal miR-200c is a potential diagnostic biomarker for breast cancer. Biomarkers 2024, 29, 419–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Li, S.; Zhang, M.; Xu, F.; Wang, Y.; Leng, D. Detection significance of miR-3662, miR-146a, and miR-1290 in serum exosomes of breast cancer patients. J. Cancer Res. Ther. 2021, 17, 749–755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Kan, J.Y.; Shih, S.L.; Yang, S.F.; Chu, P.Y.; Chen, F.M.; Li, C.L.; Wu, Y.C.; Yeh, Y.T.; Hou, M.F.; Chiang, C.P. Exosomal microRNA-92b Is a Diagnostic Biomarker in Breast Cancer and Targets Survival-Related MTSS1L to Promote Tumorigenesis. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 1295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Li, D.; Wang, J.; Ma, L.-J.; Yang, H.-B.; Jing, J.-F.; Jia, M.-M.; Zhang, X.-J.; Guo, F.; Gao, J.-N. Identification of serum exosomal miR-148a as a novel prognostic biomarker for breast cancer. Eur. Rev. Med. Pharmacol. Sci. 2020, 24, 7303–7309. [Google Scholar]
  66. Wang, M.; Wang, Y.; Tian, X.; Wang, Q.; Huang, H.; Lu, X.; Qi, M.; Cao, X.; Lei, J. Diagnostic and predictive value of liquid biopsy-derived exosome miR-21 for breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Expert Rev. Mol. Diagn. 2023, 23, 315–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Hannafon, B.N.; Trigoso, Y.D.; Calloway, C.L.; Zhao, Y.D.; Lum, D.H.; Welm, A.L.; Zhao, Z.J.; Blick, K.E.; Dooley, W.C.; Ding, W.Q. Plasma exosome microRNAs are indicative of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2016, 18, 90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Ando, W.; Kikuchi, K.; Uematsu, T.; Yokomori, H.; Takaki, T.; Sogabe, M.; Kohgo, Y.; Otori, K.; Ishikawa, S.; Okazaki, I. Novel breast cancer screening: Combined expression of miR-21 and MMP-1 in urinary exosomes detects 95% of breast cancer without metastasis. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 13595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Hirschfeld, M.; Rücker, G.; Weiß, D.; Berner, K.; Ritter, A.; Jäger, M.; Erbes, T. Urinary Exosomal MicroRNAs as Potential Non-invasive Biomarkers in Breast Cancer Detection. Mol. Diagn. Ther. 2020, 24, 215–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Kim, M.W.; Park, S.; Lee, H.; Gwak, H.; Hyun, K.; Kim, J.Y.; Jung, H.I.; Kim, S.I. Multi-miRNA panel of tumor-derived extracellular vesicles as promising diagnostic biomarkers of early-stage breast cancer. Cancer Sci. 2021, 112, 5078–5087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Stevic, I.; Müller, V.; Weber, K.; Fasching, P.A.; Karn, T.; Marmé, F.; Schem, C.; Stickeler, E.; Denkert, C.; van Mackelenbergh, M.; et al. Specific microRNA signatures in exosomes of triple-negative and HER2-positive breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy within the GeparSixto trial. BMC Med. 2018, 16, 179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Wu, H.; Wang, Q.; Zhong, H.; Li, L.; Zhang, Q.; Huang, Q.; Yu, Z. Differentially expressed microRNAs in exosomes of patients with breast cancer revealed by next generation sequencing. Oncol. Rep. 2019, 43, 240–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Yao, L.; Chen, G.; Zhang, L.; Zhang, Q. Serum exosomal miR-335-5p serves as a diagnostic biomarker of triple-negative breast cancer. Chin. J. Endocr. Surg. 2021, 6, 458–462. [Google Scholar]
  74. Ozawa, P.M.M.; Viera, E.; Lemos, D.S.; Souza, I.L.M.; Zanata, S.M.; Pankievicz, V.C.; Tuleski, T.R.; Souza, E.M.; Wowk, P.F.; de Andrade Urban, C.; et al. Identification of miRNAs Enriched in Extracellular Vesicles Derived from Serum Samples of Breast Cancer Patients. Biomolecules 2020, 10, 150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Choudhary, A.; Poojary, S.S.; Jain, P.; Chaturvedi, H.; Das, B.C. Identification of novel exosomal miRNAs and their role in diagnosis and prognosis of Triple Negative Breast Cancer. BMC Cancer 2026, 26, 210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Thakur, S.; Grover, R.K.; Gupta, S.; Yadav, A.K.; Das, B.C. Identification of Specific miRNA Signature in Paired Sera and Tissue Samples of Indian Women with Triple Negative Breast Cancer. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0158946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Yang, S.; Tang, J. Exosomal circular RNAs derived from serum: Promising biomarkers for therapeutic targets and prognosis of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). J. Clin. Oncol. 2020, 38, 3528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Liang, Y.; Ye, F.; Luo, D.; Long, L.; Wang, Y.; Jin, Y.; Wang, L.; Li, Y.; Han, D.; Chen, B.; et al. Exosomal circSIPA1L3-mediated intercellular communication contributes to glucose metabolic reprogramming and progression of triple negative breast cancer. Mol. Cancer 2024, 23, 125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Ji, J.; Li, M.; Yan, K.; Ma, J.; Wei, D.; Zhang, F.; Qiao, S.; Huang, P.; Zhang, W.; Li, L.; et al. circSTIL mediates pirarubicin inhibiting the malignant phenotype of triple-negative breast cancer and acts as a biomarker in plasma exosomes. Mol. Immunol. 2025, 180, 86–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Yang, S.-J.; Wang, D.-D.; Zhong, S.-L.; Chen, W.-Q.; Wang, F.-L.; Zhang, J.; Xu, W.X.; Xu, D.; Zhang, Q.; Li, J.; et al. Tumor-derived exosomal circPSMA1 facilitates the tumorigenesis, metastasis, and migration in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) through miR-637/Akt1/β-catenin (cyclin D1) axis. Cell Death Dis. 2021, 12, 420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Lan, F.; Zhang, X.; Li, H.; Yue, X.; Sun, Q. Serum exosomal lncRNA XIST is a potential non-invasive biomarker to diagnose recurrence of triple-negative breast cancer. J. Cell. Mol. Med. 2021, 25, 7602–7607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Na-Er, A.; Xu, Y.-Y.; Liu, Y.-H.; Gan, Y.-J. Upregulation of serum exosomal SUMO1P3 predicts unfavorable prognosis in triple negative breast cancer. Eur. Rev. Med. Pharmacol. Sci. 2021, 25, 154–160. [Google Scholar]
  83. Li, S.; Li, X.; Yang, S.; Pi, H.; Li, Z.; Yao, P.; Zhang, Q.; Wang, Q.; Shen, P.; Li, X.; et al. Proteomic Landscape of Exosomes Reveals the Functional Contributions of CD151 in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. Mol. Cell. Proteom. 2021, 20, 100121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Chaudhary, P.; Gibbs, L.D.; Maji, S.; Lewis, C.M.; Suzuki, S.; Vishwanatha, J.K. Serum exosomal-annexin A2 is associated with African-American triple-negative breast cancer and promotes angiogenesis. Breast Cancer Res. 2020, 22, 11, Erratum in Breast Cancer Res. 2020, 22, 31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Risha, Y.; Minic, Z.; Ghobadloo, S.M.; Berezovski, M.V. The proteomic analysis of breast cell line exosomes reveals disease patterns and potential biomarkers. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 13572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Sueta, A.; Fujiki, Y.; Goto Yamaguchi, L.; Tomiguchi, M.; Yamamoto Ibusuki, M.; Iwase, H.; Yamamoto, Y. Exosomal miRNA profiles of triple negative breast cancer in neoadjuvant treatment. Oncol. Lett. 2021, 22, 819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Rodríguez-Martínez, A.; de Miguel-Pérez, D.; Ortega, F.G.; García-Puche, J.L.; Robles-Fernández, I.; Exposito, J.; Martorell-Marugan, J.; Carmona-Saez, P.; Garrido-Navas, M.D.C.; Rolfo, C.; et al. Exosomal miRNA profile as complementary tool in the diagnostic and prediction of treatment response in localized breast cancer under neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res. 2019, 21, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Di Modica, M.; Regondi, V.; Sandri, M.; Iorio, M.V.; Zanetti, A.; Tagliabue, E.; Casalini, P.; Triulzi, T. Breast cancer-secreted miR-939 downregulates VE-cadherin and destroys the barrier function of endothelial monolayers. Cancer Lett. 2017, 384, 94–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Niu, L.; Bai, Y.; Yu, M.; Sun, X. LINC00899 suppresses the progression of triple-negative breast cancer via the miRNA-425/PTEN axis and is a biomarker for neoadjuvant chemotherapy efficacy. J. Cancer 2025, 16, 1647–1655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Ye, F.; Liang, Y.; Wang, J.; Song, J.; Jin, Y.; Wang, L.; Luo, D.; Li, X.; Li, Y.; Han, D.; et al. A novel peptide MIB1-223aa encoded by exosomal circMIB1 from cancer-associated fibroblasts drives triple-negative breast cancer metastasis and stemness via stabilizing MIB1 to activate Notch signaling. J. Adv. Res. 2025, in press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Zhu, T.; Wang, J.; Li, J.; Zhang, Q.; Shang, Y.; Zhou, J.; Min, L.; Lv, B.; Luo, K. A serum LncRNA signature for predicting prognosis of triple-negative breast cancer. Clin. Chim. Acta 2023, 549, 117535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Cui, Z.; Chen, Y.; Hu, M.; Lin, Y.; Zhang, S.; Kong, L.; Chen, Y. Diagnostic and prognostic value of the cancer-testis antigen lactate dehydrogenase C4 in breast cancer. Clin. Chim. Acta 2020, 503, 203–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Jung, H.H.; Kim, J.Y.; Cho, E.Y.; Lee, J.E.; Kim, S.W.; Nam, S.J.; Park, Y.H.; Ahn, J.S.; Im, Y.H. A Retrospective Exploratory Analysis for Serum Extracellular Vesicles Reveals APRIL (TNFSF13), CXCL13, and VEGF-A as Prognostic Biomarkers for Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 15576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Zhou, Y.; Tao, L.; Qiu, J.; Xu, J.; Yang, X.; Zhang, Y.; Tian, X.; Guan, X.; Cen, X.; Zhao, Y. Tumor biomarkers for diagnosis, prognosis and targeted therapy. Signal Transduct. Target. Ther. 2024, 9, 132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. König, L.; Kasimir-Bauer, S.; Bittner, A.K.; Hoffmann, O.; Wagner, B.; Santos Manvailer, L.F.; Kimmig, R.; Horn, P.R.; Rebmann, V. Elevated levels of extracellular vesicles are associated with therapy failure and disease progression in breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Oncoimmunology 2018, 7, e1376153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Todorova, V.K.; Byrum, S.D.; Gies, A.J.; Haynie, C.; Smith, H.; Reyna, N.S.; Makhoul, I. Circulating Exosomal microRNAs as Predictive Biomarkers of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Response in Breast Cancer. Curr. Oncol. 2022, 29, 613–630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  97. Salvador-Coloma, C.; Santaballa, A.; Sanmartín, E.; Calvo, D.; García, A.; Hervás, D.; Cordon, L.; Quintas, G.; Ripoll, F.; Panadero, J.; et al. Immunosuppressive profiles in liquid biopsy at diagnosis predict response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer. Eur. J. Cancer 2020, 139, 119–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Li, Y.; Liang, Y.; Sang, Y.; Song, X.; Zhang, H.; Liu, Y.; Jiang, L.; Yang, Q. MiR-770 suppresses the chemo-resistance and metastasis of triple negative breast cancer via direct targeting of STMN1. Cell Death Dis. 2018, 9, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Yang, L.; Fan, J.; Dong, C.; Wang, X.; Ma, B. Correlative expression of exosomal miRNAs in chemotherapy resistance of triple-negative breast cancer: An observational study. Medicine 2024, 103, e38549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Li, T.; Tao, Z.; Zhu, Y.; Liu, X.; Wang, L.; Du, Y.; Cao, J.; Wang, B.; Zhang, J.; Hu, X. Exosomal annexin A6 induces gemcitabine resistance by inhibiting ubiquitination and degradation of EGFR in triple-negative breast cancer. Cell Death Dis. 2021, 12, 684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Raimondi, L.; Raimondi, F.M.; Lazzeroni, R.; Di Benedetto, L.; Cimino, G.; Spinelli, G.P. Prediction of response to atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel in unresectable locally advanced triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC): The clinical usefulness of PD-L1 mRNA expression in plasma-derived exosomes. Preprints 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Schmid, P.; Adams, S.; Rugo, H.S.; Schneeweiss, A.; Barrios, C.H.; Iwata, H.; Dieras, V.; Hegg, R.; Im, S.I.; Wright, G.S.; et al. Atezolizumab and Nab-Paclitaxel in Advanced Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2018, 379, 2108–2121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Qi, Y.; Yan, X.; Wang, C.; Cao, H.; Liu, G. Predictive value of PD-L1 expression to the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced triple-negative breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Front. Pharmacol. 2022, 13, 1004821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Wang, Y.; Zhou, Y.; Yang, L.; Lei, L.; He, B.; Cao, J.; Gao, H. Challenges Coexist with Opportunities: Spatial Heterogeneity Expression of PD-L1 in Cancer Therapy. Adv. Sci. 2024, 11, e2303175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Kansha, T.; Ma, X.; Wang, H.; Yu, X.; Song, Y.; Guo, Z.; Song, J.; Xue, L.; Yang, J. Exosomal PD-L1 detection in cancer predictive biomarker for response to immune checkpoint blockade therapy. Front. Immunol. 2025, 16, 1603855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  106. Zhou, K.; Guo, S.; Li, F.; Sun, Q.; Liang, G. Exosomal PD-L1: New Insights into Tumor Immune Escape Mechanisms and Therapeutic Strategies. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2020, 8, 569219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Wu, Y.; Fu, H.; Hao, J.; Yang, Z.; Qiao, X.; Li, Y.; Zhao, R.; Lin, T.; Wang, Y.; Wang, M. Tumor-derived exosomal PD-L1: A new perspective in PD-1/PD-L1 therapy for lung cancer. Front. Immunol. 2024, 15, 1342728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Aysola, K.; Desai, A.; Welch, C.; Xu, J.; Qin, Y.; Reddy, V.; Matthews, R.; Owens, C.; Okoli, J.; Beech, D.J.; et al. Triple Negative Breast Cancer—An Overview. Hered. Genet. 2013, 2013, 001. [Google Scholar]
  109. Velpula, T.; Buddolla, V. Enhancing detection and monitoring of circulating tumor cells: Integrative approaches in liquid biopsy advances. J. Liq. Biopsy 2025, 8, 100297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Li, X.; Corbett, A.L.; Taatizadeh, E.; Tasnim, N.; Little, J.P.; Garnis, C.; Daugaard, M.; Guns, E.; Hoorfar, M.; Li, I.T.S. Challenges and opportunities in exosome research—Perspectives from biology, engineering, and cancer therapy. APL Bioeng. 2019, 3, 011503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Omrani, M.; Beyrampour-Basmenj, H.; Jahanban-Esfahlan, R.; Talebi, M.; Raeisi, M.; Serej, Z.A.; Akbar-Gharalari, N.; Khodakarimi, S.; Wu, J.; Ebrahimi-Kalan, A. Global trend in exosome isolation and application: An update concept in management of diseases. Mol. Cell. Biochem. 2024, 479, 679–691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Goh, C.Y.; Wyse, C.; Ho, M.; O’Beirne, E.; Howard, J.; Lindsay, S.; Kelly, P.; Higgins, M.; McCann, A. Exosomes in triple negative breast cancer: Garbage disposals or Trojan horses? Cancer Lett. 2020, 473, 90–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Ijms 27 01918 g001
Figure 1. An exosome, enveloped by a phospholipid bilayer, hosts a rich and diverse molecular cargo. This includes membrane proteins (such as tetraspanins, antigen-presenting molecules, adhesion molecules, glycoproteins, signaling receptors and membrane transport/fusion proteins), internal proteins (such as heat shock proteins, cytoskeletal proteins, ESCRT system components and growth factors), as well as various types of nucleic acids and lipids. This composition reflects the cellular origin and the exosome’s role in intercellular communication (Created with BioRender.com).
Figure 1. An exosome, enveloped by a phospholipid bilayer, hosts a rich and diverse molecular cargo. This includes membrane proteins (such as tetraspanins, antigen-presenting molecules, adhesion molecules, glycoproteins, signaling receptors and membrane transport/fusion proteins), internal proteins (such as heat shock proteins, cytoskeletal proteins, ESCRT system components and growth factors), as well as various types of nucleic acids and lipids. This composition reflects the cellular origin and the exosome’s role in intercellular communication (Created with BioRender.com).
Ijms 27 01918 g001
Ijms 27 01918 g002
Figure 2. Exosome biogenesis begins with the formation of early endosomes and continues with their maturation into late endosomes and MVBs. Within MVBs, ILVs are formed via both ESCRT-dependent and ESCRT-independent pathways. The process culminates with the fusion of MVBs with the plasma membrane and the release of exosomes into the extracellular space (created with BioRender.com).
Figure 2. Exosome biogenesis begins with the formation of early endosomes and continues with their maturation into late endosomes and MVBs. Within MVBs, ILVs are formed via both ESCRT-dependent and ESCRT-independent pathways. The process culminates with the fusion of MVBs with the plasma membrane and the release of exosomes into the extracellular space (created with BioRender.com).
Ijms 27 01918 g002
Table 3. (a) Exosomal miRNAs and lncRNAs as predictive biomarkers for chemotherapy response in TNBC. (b) Exosomal proteins as predictive biomarkers for chemotherapy response in TNBC. (c) Exosomal PD-L1 as a predictive biomarker for immunotherapy response in TNBC.
Table 3. (a) Exosomal miRNAs and lncRNAs as predictive biomarkers for chemotherapy response in TNBC. (b) Exosomal proteins as predictive biomarkers for chemotherapy response in TNBC. (c) Exosomal PD-L1 as a predictive biomarker for immunotherapy response in TNBC.
(a)
BiomarkerSample TypeN (Patients)/N (Controls/Others)Correlation/FindingSource
SUMO1P3serum130 TNBCDecreased in cases of chemosensitivity, unchanged in cases of chemoresistance in Chinese TNBC patients.[82]
LINC00899plasma59 TNBCHigh predictive value for pathological outcome in Chinese TNBC patients receiving neoadjuvant treatment, indicating its potential to predict chemotherapy efficacy.[89]
circSTILplasma59 TNBC Significantly increased in Chinese TNBC patients without NAC compared to patients who received NAC.[79]
miR-4448serum24 TNBCHigher in Japanese patients with a pathological complete response to NAC.[86]
miR-2392
miR-2467-3p
miR-4800-3p
miR-127plasma20 BCUpregulation associated with pCR to NAC in American BC patients.[96]
miR-34aAfter the first dose of NACT, high expression predicted non-pCR in American BC patients (6/20 TNBC).
miR-182
miR-183
miR-185plasma34 TNBCLower in Spanish TNBC patients with no NACT response.[97]
miR-4283
miR-5008
miR-3613
miR-1302Higher in Spanish TNBC patients with no NACT response.
miR-4715
miR-3144
miR-770tissue49 TNBCHighly expressed in chemosensitive tissues and predicted a better prognosis for Chinese TNBC.[98]
miR-6831-5pserum36 TNBCSignificant difference in expression between responding and drug-resistant Chinese patients to chemotherapy.[99]
miRNA-21serum53 BCDuring therapy, miRNA-21 levels were directly correlated with tumor size and inversely with Ki67 expression in Spanish BC patients (13 TNBC/53).[87]
(b)
BiomarkerSample TypeN (Patients)/N (Controls/Others)Correlation/FindingSource
ANXA6serum81 TNBCLower levels in highly sensitive Chinese TNBC patients than in resistant TNBC patients when they received first-line chemotherapy.[100]
(c)
BiomarkerSample TypeN (Patients)/N (Controls/Others)Correlation/FindingSource
PD-L1plasma77 TNBCHigher number of PD-L1 mRNA copies per mL in Italian patients with complete and partial responses compared to those with stable or progressive disease. Increase in PD-L1 mRNA copies per mL after treatment were associated with significantly shorter PFS and OS.[101]
plasma902 TNBCPredictive biomarker for ICB therapies in metastatic TNBC patients from 41 countries.[102]
Abbreviations: BC: breast cancer, HC: healthy control, TNBC: triple-negative breast cancer, DFS: disease-free survival, OS: overall survival, NACT: neo-adjuvant chemotherapy treatment, PD-L1: programmed death-ligand 1, ICB: immune checkpoint blockade.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Loukopoulou, M.; Kottorou, A.; Koutras, A.; Dimitrakopoulos, F.-I. Exosomes and Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Current Knowledge and Clinical Significance. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2026, 27, 1918. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27041918

AMA Style

Loukopoulou M, Kottorou A, Koutras A, Dimitrakopoulos F-I. Exosomes and Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Current Knowledge and Clinical Significance. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2026; 27(4):1918. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27041918

Chicago/Turabian Style

Loukopoulou, Maria, Anastasia Kottorou, Angelos Koutras, and Foteinos-Ioannis Dimitrakopoulos. 2026. "Exosomes and Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Current Knowledge and Clinical Significance" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 27, no. 4: 1918. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27041918

APA Style

Loukopoulou, M., Kottorou, A., Koutras, A., & Dimitrakopoulos, F.-I. (2026). Exosomes and Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Current Knowledge and Clinical Significance. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 27(4), 1918. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27041918

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop