This guide is currently available in English. A Spanish version is in progress.
Application guide
Documenting Research-Use Exosome Material in an Aesthetic Practice
Reviewed by ExaVeyra Sciences editorial team · Updated 11 September 2026
ExaVeyra Sciences is a Miami-based B2B supplier of research-use exosomes and 503A compounded peptides to licensed clinics.
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| What this is | What the research-use label means for a clinic’s own records, what a certificate of analysis does and does not establish, and the receiving and lot checks to file. |
| Who can buy | Licensed clinics and practitioners, after ExaVeyra verifies an active professional license and NPI and, for exosome material, a signed research-use acknowledgment. |
| What ships or is provided | Research-use exosome formats characterised per lot, 1 to 2 business days to prepare, then overnight cold chain. A certificate of analysis is issued for every lot and provided on request. |
A licensed aesthetic practice that brings research-use exosome material in ends up holding four documents: a signed research-use acknowledgment, a certificate of analysis for each lot, a receiving record for each shipment, and a lot record that ties a vial to the session it was opened for. Each one establishes something narrow and specific, and the practice that knows the boundaries of each has its documentation in order before anyone asks for it.
This guide walks the four documents in the order they arrive. It is written from the supplier’s side of the counter, so it covers what is supplied and what the paperwork proves. Whether and how the material is used in a given session is the licensed practitioner’s decision, and nothing here makes it for them.
The research-use label is a statement of intended use, and the file should repeat it
No exosome product has been approved by the FDA for any use in humans. FDA said so in its December 2019 public safety notification and again in its consumer alert on regenerative medicine products, and both remain current. Material distributed for topical aesthetic use in clinics and for research applications therefore carries a research-use label, which is the supplier’s written statement of the use it is supplied for.
The phrase itself comes from FDA labeling practice. FDA’s 2013 guidance on products labeled "For Research Use Only" was written for in vitro diagnostics, and it describes the label as a warning that the product is not offered for clinical diagnosis or patient management. The label on exosome material does the same job for a different product class: it tells the reader what the supplier is and is not offering.
For the clinic, the practical consequence is a matching line in its own records. The research-use acknowledgment signed at account setup is the practice’s side of that statement, and the file for each lot should carry the same framing rather than a different one written later for a different audience. A supplier document that says one thing and a practice document that says another is the discrepancy an inspector or a plaintiff’s counsel reads first.
A certificate of analysis reports the tests that were run on one lot
A certificate of analysis is issued for every lot and provided on request. The certificate names the lot, lists the assays performed, and reports each result against its specification. That is the whole of what it establishes: that those tests were run on that lot with those results.
The most common misreading is to take the absence of a line as a pass. A certificate reports what was measured, so an attribute nobody measured simply does not appear, and to anyone skimming, that absence reads the same as a clean result. The first pass over any certificate is therefore the test list, before the values: what was measured, by what method, against what specification.
Particle counts deserve one extra note, because two instruments counting the same preparation can report different numbers for reasons that are about physics rather than about the material. MISEV2023, the field’s reporting standard, sets out what a characterisation should state for a count to be interpretable, and the quality reference linked below covers the two common methods side by side.
| Document | What it establishes | What it does not establish |
|---|---|---|
| Research-use acknowledgment | That the practice received the supplier’s statement of intended use and signed for it. | Anything about how the material is used in the practice. That is the practitioner’s decision and record. |
| Certificate of analysis, lot specific | That the named tests were run on that lot and what the results were. | Anything about a different lot, about attributes nobody tested, or about suitability for any use. |
| Receiving record | The condition of the shipment when it arrived, and when it went into storage. | What happened to the material after the practice took custody of it. |
| Lot record | Which lot was opened for which session, on which date. | Anything about the session itself. The session record is a separate document with a separate author. |
Receiving is where the cold chain is either confirmed or lost
Exosome material ships cold chain, and the handover from carrier to clinic is the one moment the practice can confirm the chain held. The CDC’s storage and handling toolkit, written for vaccines and applicable to any refrigerated biological, gives the receiving steps in a form a practice can copy into a procedure.
- Open the shipment as soon as it arrives. The toolkit’s instruction is that a shipping container is never left unpacked and unattended.
- Read the temperature monitor or indicator that travelled with the shipment before anything goes into storage, and record what it showed.
- Compare the contents against the packing list: product, format, quantity and lot number, and check the label date on each container.
- Move the material to the storage condition stated on its certificate of analysis. Do not put the unopened shipping box into the storage unit, since shipping cool packs can take the contents below range.
- Write the receiving record: date, time, who received it, what the monitor showed, and the lot numbers received.
If the monitor reads outside range, the CDC’s excursion sheet gives the sequence: label the material "do not use", store it separately at the correct condition rather than discarding it, document the event including the lot numbers affected, and contact the supplier with that documentation before any decision is made about the material. ExaVeyra asks for exactly that call, before use rather than after.
Lot traceability is a two-line habit that survives staff turnover
Traceability means that for any session, the practice can name the lot that was opened, and for any lot, the practice can name the sessions it was opened for. Two lines do it: the lot number written into the session record at the time, and the same lot number entered against that date in a running lot log.
The log is what makes a field notification actionable. A supplier who withdraws a lot needs the practice to find every session that lot touched within an afternoon, and a practice that has been writing the two lines can. One that has been relying on memory or on the invoice cannot, and learns that at the worst possible moment.
Keep the certificate for each lot filed with the log, and keep both for as long as the practice’s own record retention rule requires for the session records they support. The certificate and the log are what a state board, an insurer or a supplier will ask to see, and the discipline of producing them is the same discipline that keeps them accurate.
Where the material sits in a session is documented by the practitioner, in their own words
A supplier can say what it supplied, what the lot was, and what the certificate reports. It cannot say where a topical application belongs in a given session, or whether one belongs at all, because that is a clinical judgement made by a licensed practitioner about an individual person. The session record therefore has a different author from every document above.
Two things belong to the practice alone and are worth writing down once as policy rather than improvising per session. The first is who in the practice may handle and apply material under the state’s delegation rules, which the state sourcing guides linked below set out board by board. The second is the written consent the practice uses, which should describe the material in the same research-use terms as the supplier documents rather than in terms that promise something the label does not.
How ordering from ExaVeyra fits the file
ExaVeyra verifies an active professional license and NPI before opening an account, and takes a signed research-use acknowledgment for exosome material as part of setup. Those two steps produce the first document in the file before the first order is placed.
Exosome orders take 1 to 2 business days to prepare, then overnight cold chain, with a temperature monitor in the shipment and each container labelled with its lot number. A certificate of analysis is issued for every lot and provided on request. The receiving record and the lot log are the practice’s own, and the two-line habit above is what turns a supplier’s documentation into a file the practice can stand behind.
Sources
- FDA, Public Safety Notification on Exosome Products (6 December 2019) (accessed 10 September 2026)
- FDA, Consumer Alert on Regenerative Medicine Products Including Stem Cells and Exosomes (accessed 10 September 2026)
- FDA, Distribution of In Vitro Diagnostic Products Labeled for Research Use Only or Investigational Use Only (guidance, November 2013) (accessed 10 September 2026)
- CDC, Vaccine Storage and Handling Toolkit (2026 edition), receiving and unpacking deliveries (accessed 10 September 2026)
- CDC, Handling a Temperature Excursion in Your Vaccine Storage Unit (accessed 10 September 2026)
Scientific literature
Each source carries the kind of study it was and, where the study enrolled people, how many. Study design decides what a result can establish, so it is stated rather than left to be inferred. Each line also says what that source is carrying on this page.
- Welsh JA, Goberdhan DCI, O’Driscoll L, et al. Minimal information for studies of extracellular vesicles (MISEV2023): from basic to advanced approaches. Journal of Extracellular Vesicles, 2024. doi:10.1002/jev2.12404 PMID:38326288Consensus statementLandmarkSource 1 supports: The field’s reporting standard for vesicle characterisation. Cited for the certificate section: it states what a particle count and a marker panel need to report before a reader can interpret them, which is the yardstick a practice can hold a certificate to.