Search > Results

You searched for: EV120104 (EV-TRACK ID)

Showing 1 - 1 of 1

Experiment number
  • If needed, multiple experiments were identified in a single publication based on differing sample types, separation protocols and/or vesicle types of interest.
Species
  • Species of origin of the EVs.
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the different steps of the separation protocol.
    • (d)(U)C = (differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
Details EV-TRACK ID Experiment nr. Species Sample type Separation protocol First author Year EV-METRIC
EV120104 1/1 Homo sapiens Synovial fluid (d)(U)C
Filtration
György B 2012 29%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
György B, Szabó TG, Turiák L, Wright M, Herczeg P, Lédeczi Z, Kittel A, Polgár A, Tóth K, Dérfalvi B, Zelenák G, Böröcz I, Carr B, Nagy G, Vékey K, Gay S, Falus A, Buzás EI
Journal
PLoS One
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Microvesicles (MVs), earlier referred to as microparticles, represent a major type of (show more...)INTRODUCTION: Microvesicles (MVs), earlier referred to as microparticles, represent a major type of extracellular vesicles currently considered as novel biomarkers in various clinical settings such as autoimmune disorders. However, the analysis of MVs in body fluids has not been fully standardized yet, and there are numerous pitfalls that hinder the correct assessment of these structures. METHODS: In this study, we analyzed synovial fluid (SF) samples of patients with osteoarthritis (OA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). To assess factors that may confound MV detection in joint diseases, we used electron microscopy (EM), Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis (NTA) and mass spectrometry (MS). For flow cytometry, a method commonly used for phenotyping and enumeration of MVs, we combined recent advances in the field, and used a novel approach of differential detergent lysis for the exclusion of MV-mimicking non-vesicular signals. RESULTS: EM and NTA showed that substantial amounts of particles other than MVs were present in SF samples. Beyond known MV-associated proteins, MS analysis also revealed abundant plasma- and immune complex-related proteins in MV preparations. Applying improved flow cytometric analysis, we demonstrate for the first time that CD3(+) and CD8(+) T-cell derived SF MVs are highly elevated in patients with RA compared to OA patients (p=0.027 and p=0.009, respectively, after Bonferroni corrections). In JIA, we identified reduced numbers of B cell-derived MVs (p=0.009, after Bonferroni correction). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that improved flow cytometric assessment of MVs facilitates the detection of previously unrecognized disease-associated vesicular signatures. (hide)
EV-METRIC
29% (21st percentile of all experiments on the same sample type)
 Reported
 Not reported
 Not applicable
EV-enriched proteins
Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins
non EV-enriched protein
Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein
qualitative and quantitative analysis
Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Synovial fluid
Sample origin
NAY
Focus vesicles
microvesicles / microparticles
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(d)(U)C
Filtration
Protein markers
EV:
non-EV:
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Synovial fluid
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: time(min)
60
Filtration steps
> 0.45 µm,
Characterization: Protein analysis
Flow cytometry specific beads
Antibody details provided?
No
Antibody dilution provided?
No
Selected surface protein(s)
Yes
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
EM
EM-type
transmission EM
Image type
Wide-field
1 - 1 of 1
  • CM = Commercial method
  • dUC = differential ultracentrifugation
  • DG = density gradient
  • UF = ultrafiltration
  • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
EV-TRACK ID
EV120104
species
Homo sapiens
sample type
Synovial fluid
condition
NAY
separation protocol
(d)(U)C
Filtration
Exp. nr.
1
EV-METRIC %
29