Background Extracellular vesicles (EVs) play an essential role in the communication between cells and transport of diagnostically significant molecules. A wide diversity of approaches utilizing different biochemical properties of EVs and a lack of accepted protocols make data interpretation very challenging. Scope of Review This review consolidates the data on the classical and state-of-the-art methods for isolation of EVs, including exosomes, highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of each method. Various characteristics of individual methods, including isolation efficiency, EV yield, properties of isolated EVs, and labor consumption are compared. Major Conclusions A mixed population of vesicles is obtained in most studies of EVs for all used isolation methods. The properties of an analyzed sample should be taken into account when planning an experiment aimed at studying and using these vesicles. The problem of adequate EVs isolation methods still remains; it might not be possible to develop a universal EV isolation method but the available protocols can be used towards solving particular types of problems. General Significance With the wide use of EVs for diagnosis and therapy of various diseases the evaluation of existing methods for EV isolation is one of the key problems in modern biology and medicine.

Prostate cancer is a global biological, medical, and social issue aggravated by the lack of reliable, highly specific, and sensitive non-invasive tests for diagnosis and staging of prostate cancer. One prospective source of biomarkers are the cell-free miRNAs present in various biological fluids. In the present study, we validated the diagnostic potential of cell-free miRNAs: miR-19b, miR-22, miR-92a, miR-378, miR-425, miR-30e, miR-31, miR-125b, miR-200b, miR-205, miR-375, and miR-660; we estimated the required sample size and the minimal miRNA set for a subsequent large-scale validation study. Relative expression of 12 miRNA combined in 31 ratios was investigated in three fractions of biological fluids (urine extracellular vesicles, clarified urine, and plasma) obtained from patients with prostate cancer (n = 10), benign prostate hyperplasia (n = 8), and healthy volunteers (n = 11). Eight of the miRNAs found in urine vesicles (miR-19b, miR-30e, miR-31, miR-92a, miR-125, miR-200, miR-205, and miR-660) showed great promise and when combined into six ratios (miR-125b/miR-30e, miR-200/miR-30e, miR-205/miR-30e, miR-31/miR-30e, miR-660/miR-30e, and miR-19b/miR-92a) could classify patients with prostate cancer, benign prostate hyperplasia, and healthy donors with 100% specificity, 100% sensitivity, and with a high degree of reliability for most donors.