Search > Results

You searched for: EV150062 (EV-TRACK ID)

Showing 1 - 2 of 2

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.
    • dUC = differential ultracentrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
Experiment number
  • Experiments differ in Sample type
Experiment number
  • Experiments differ in Sample type
Details EV-TRACK ID Experiment nr. Species Sample type separation protocol First author Year EV-METRIC
EV150062 1/2 Homo sapiens Vitreous humor dUC
Filtration
Ragusa M 2015 25%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Ragusa M, Barbagallo C, Statello L, Caltabiano R, Russo A, Puzzo L, Avitabile T, Longo A, Toro MD, Barbagallo D, Valadi H, Di Pietro C, Purrello M, Reibaldi M
Journal
Cancer Biol Ther
Abstract
Uveal melanoma (UM) represents approximately 5-6% of all melanoma diagnoses and up to 50% of patient (show more...)Uveal melanoma (UM) represents approximately 5-6% of all melanoma diagnoses and up to 50% of patients succumb to their disease. Although several methods are available, accurate diagnosis is not always easily feasible because of potential accidents (e.g., intraocular hemorrhage). Based on the assumption that the profile of circulating miRNAs is often altered in human cancers, we verified whether UM patients showed different vitreous humor (VH) or serum miRNA profiles with respect to healthy controls. By using TaqMan Low Density Arrays, we analyzed 754 miRNAs from VH, vitreal exosomes, and serum of 6 UM patients and 6 healthy donors: our data demonstrated that the UM VH profile was unique and only partially overlapping with that from serum of the same patients. Whereas, 90% of miRNAs were shared between VH and vitreal exosomes, and their alterations in UM were statistically overlapped with those of VH and vitreal exosomes, suggesting that VH alterations could result from exosomal dysregulation. We report 32 miRNAs differentially expressed in UM patients in at least 2 different types of samples analyzed. We validated these data on an independent cohort of 12 UM patients. Most alterations were common to VH and vitreal exosomes (e.g., upregulation of miR-21,-34 a,-146a). Interestingly, miR-146a was upregulated in the serum of UM patients, as well as in serum exosomes. Upregulation of miR-21 and miR-146a was also detected in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded UM, suggesting that VH or serum alterations in UM could be the consequence of disregulation arising from tumoral cells. Our findings suggest the possibility to detect in VH and serum of UM patients diagnostic miRNAs released by the affected eye: based on this, miR-146a could be considered a potential circulating marker of UM. (hide)
EV-METRIC
25% (50th 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
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
Vitreous humor
Sample origin
DNF
Focus vesicles
exosomes
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = differential ultracentrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
dUC + Filtration
Adj. k-factor
211.6 (pelleting)
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ CD63/ CD9
non-EV:
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Vitreous humor
Separation Method
Differential ultracentrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
70
Pelleting: rotor type
SW28
Pelleting: adjusted k-factor
211.6
Filtration steps
0.22µm or 0.2µm
Characterization: Particle analysis
DLS
EV150062 2/2 Homo sapiens Serum dUC
Filtration
Ragusa M 2015 14%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Ragusa M, Barbagallo C, Statello L, Caltabiano R, Russo A, Puzzo L, Avitabile T, Longo A, Toro MD, Barbagallo D, Valadi H, Di Pietro C, Purrello M, Reibaldi M
Journal
Cancer Biol Ther
Abstract
Uveal melanoma (UM) represents approximately 5-6% of all melanoma diagnoses and up to 50% of patient (show more...)Uveal melanoma (UM) represents approximately 5-6% of all melanoma diagnoses and up to 50% of patients succumb to their disease. Although several methods are available, accurate diagnosis is not always easily feasible because of potential accidents (e.g., intraocular hemorrhage). Based on the assumption that the profile of circulating miRNAs is often altered in human cancers, we verified whether UM patients showed different vitreous humor (VH) or serum miRNA profiles with respect to healthy controls. By using TaqMan Low Density Arrays, we analyzed 754 miRNAs from VH, vitreal exosomes, and serum of 6 UM patients and 6 healthy donors: our data demonstrated that the UM VH profile was unique and only partially overlapping with that from serum of the same patients. Whereas, 90% of miRNAs were shared between VH and vitreal exosomes, and their alterations in UM were statistically overlapped with those of VH and vitreal exosomes, suggesting that VH alterations could result from exosomal dysregulation. We report 32 miRNAs differentially expressed in UM patients in at least 2 different types of samples analyzed. We validated these data on an independent cohort of 12 UM patients. Most alterations were common to VH and vitreal exosomes (e.g., upregulation of miR-21,-34 a,-146a). Interestingly, miR-146a was upregulated in the serum of UM patients, as well as in serum exosomes. Upregulation of miR-21 and miR-146a was also detected in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded UM, suggesting that VH or serum alterations in UM could be the consequence of disregulation arising from tumoral cells. Our findings suggest the possibility to detect in VH and serum of UM patients diagnostic miRNAs released by the affected eye: based on this, miR-146a could be considered a potential circulating marker of UM. (hide)
EV-METRIC
14% (63rd 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
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
Serum
Sample origin
DNF
Focus vesicles
exosomes
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = differential ultracentrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
dUC + Filtration
Adj. k-factor
211.6 (pelleting)
Protein markers
EV:
non-EV:
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Serum
Separation Method
Differential ultracentrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
70
Pelleting: rotor type
SW28
Pelleting: adjusted k-factor
211.6
Filtration steps
0.22µm or 0.2µm
Characterization: Particle analysis
1 - 2 of 2
  • CM = Commercial method
  • dUC = differential ultracentrifugation
  • DG = density gradient
  • UF = ultrafiltration
  • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
EV-TRACK ID
EV150062
species
Homo sapiens
sample type
Vitreous humor
Serum
separation protocol
dUC
Filtration
dUC
Filtration
Exp. nr.
1
2
EV-METRIC %
25
14