EV-TRACK

Search > Results

You searched for: 2012 (Year of publication)

Showing 251 - 268 of 268

Results list

Details	EV-TRACK ID	Experiment nr.	Species	Sample type	Separation protocol	First author	Year	EV-METRIC
	EV120128	1/2	Homo sapiens	Saliva	(d)(U)C	Gallo A	2012	0%
Study summary Full title The majority of microRNAs detectable in serum and saliva is concentrated in exosomes All authors Gallo A, Tandon M, Alevizos I, Illei GG Journal PLoS One Abstract There is an increasing interest in using microRNAs (miRNA) as biomarkers in autoimmune diseases. The (show more...)There is an increasing interest in using microRNAs (miRNA) as biomarkers in autoimmune diseases. They are easily accessible in many body fluids but it is controversial if they are circulating freely or are encapsulated in microvesicles, particularly exosomes. We investigated if the majority of miRNas in serum and saliva are free-circulating or concentrated in exosomes. Exosomes were isolated by ultracentrifugation from fresh and frozen human serum and saliva. The amount of selected miRNAs extracted from the exosomal pellet and the exosome-depleted serum and saliva was compared by quantitative RT-PCR. Some miRNAs tested are ubiquitously expressed, others were previously reported as biomarkers. We included miRNAs previously reported to be free circulating and some thought to be exosome specific. The purity of exosome fraction was confirmed by electronmicroscopy and western blot. The concentration of miRNAs was consistently higher in the exosome pellet compared to the exosome-depleted supernatant. We obtained the same results using an equal volume or equal amount of total RNA as input of the RT-qPCR. The concentration of miRNA in whole, unfractionated serum, was between the exosomal pellet and the exosome-depleted supernatant. Selected miRNAs, which were detectable in exosomes, were undetectable in whole serum and the exosome-depleted supernantant. Exosome isolation improves the sensitivity of miRNA amplification from human biologic fluids. Exosomal miRNA should be the starting point for early biomarker studies to reduce the probability of false negative results involving low abundance miRNAs that may be missed by using unfractionated serum or saliva. (hide) EV-METRIC 0% (median: 29% 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 Saliva Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles exosomes 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 Protein markers EV: TSG101/ CD63 non-EV: Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Biomarker Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Saliva Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Equal to or above 150,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 60 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Antibody details provided? No Detected EV-associated proteins CD63/ TSG101 Characterization: Particle analysis EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Close-up

	EV120128	2/2	Homo sapiens	Serum	(d)(U)C	Gallo A	2012	0%
Study summary Full title The majority of microRNAs detectable in serum and saliva is concentrated in exosomes All authors Gallo A, Tandon M, Alevizos I, Illei GG Journal PLoS One Abstract There is an increasing interest in using microRNAs (miRNA) as biomarkers in autoimmune diseases. The (show more...)There is an increasing interest in using microRNAs (miRNA) as biomarkers in autoimmune diseases. They are easily accessible in many body fluids but it is controversial if they are circulating freely or are encapsulated in microvesicles, particularly exosomes. We investigated if the majority of miRNas in serum and saliva are free-circulating or concentrated in exosomes. Exosomes were isolated by ultracentrifugation from fresh and frozen human serum and saliva. The amount of selected miRNAs extracted from the exosomal pellet and the exosome-depleted serum and saliva was compared by quantitative RT-PCR. Some miRNAs tested are ubiquitously expressed, others were previously reported as biomarkers. We included miRNAs previously reported to be free circulating and some thought to be exosome specific. The purity of exosome fraction was confirmed by electronmicroscopy and western blot. The concentration of miRNAs was consistently higher in the exosome pellet compared to the exosome-depleted supernatant. We obtained the same results using an equal volume or equal amount of total RNA as input of the RT-qPCR. The concentration of miRNA in whole, unfractionated serum, was between the exosomal pellet and the exosome-depleted supernatant. Selected miRNAs, which were detectable in exosomes, were undetectable in whole serum and the exosome-depleted supernantant. Exosome isolation improves the sensitivity of miRNA amplification from human biologic fluids. Exosomal miRNA should be the starting point for early biomarker studies to reduce the probability of false negative results involving low abundance miRNAs that may be missed by using unfractionated serum or saliva. (hide) EV-METRIC 0% (median: 13% 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 Serum Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles exosomes 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 Protein markers EV: TSG101/ CD63 non-EV: Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Biomarker Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Serum Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Equal to or above 150,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 60 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Antibody details provided? No Detected EV-associated proteins CD63/ TSG101 Characterization: Particle analysis EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Close-up

	EV120127	1/1	Homo sapiens	NAY	(d)(U)C ExoQuick	Fabbri M	2012	0%
Study summary Full title MicroRNAs bind to Toll-like receptors to induce prometastatic inflammatory response All authors Fabbri M, Paone A, Calore F, Galli R, Gaudio E, Santhanam R, Lovat F, Fadda P, Mao C, Nuovo GJ, Zanesi N, Crawford M, Ozer GH, Wernicke D, Alder H, Caligiuri MA, Nana-Sinkam P, Perrotti D, Croce CM Journal Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Abstract MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small noncoding RNAs, 19-24 nucleotides in length, that regulate gene express (show more...)MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small noncoding RNAs, 19-24 nucleotides in length, that regulate gene expression and are expressed aberrantly in most types of cancer. MiRNAs also have been detected in the blood of cancer patients and can serve as circulating biomarkers. It has been shown that secreted miRNAs within exosomes can be transferred from cell to cell and can regulate gene expression in the receiving cells by canonical binding to their target messenger RNAs. Here we show that tumor-secreted miR-21 and miR-29a also can function by another mechanism, by binding as ligands to receptors of the Toll-like receptor (TLR) family, murine TLR7 and human TLR8, in immune cells, triggering a TLR-mediated prometastatic inflammatory response that ultimately may lead to tumor growth and metastasis. Thus, by acting as paracrine agonists of TLRs, secreted miRNAs are key regulators of the tumor microenvironment. This mechanism of action of miRNAs is implicated in tumor-immune system communication and is important in tumor growth and spread, thus representing a possible target for cancer treatment. (hide) EV-METRIC 0% (median: 14% 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 Cell culture supernatant Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles 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 ExoQuick Protein markers EV: CD63/ CD9 non-EV: Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Function Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium serum free Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Pelleting performed No Commercial kit ExoQuick Other Name other separation method ExoQuick Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Antibody details provided? No Detected EV-associated proteins CD63/ CD9 Characterization: Particle analysis None

	EV120126	1/1	Mesocricetus auratus	NAY	(d)(U)C	Evdokimovskaya Y	2012	0%
Study summary Full title Release of the glucose-regulated protein 94 by baby hamster kidney cells All authors Evdokimovskaya Y, Skarga Y, Vrublevskaya V, Morenkov O Journal Cell Biochem Funct Abstract Glucose-regulated protein 94 (grp94) is a major component of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) lumen of (show more...)Glucose-regulated protein 94 (grp94) is a major component of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) lumen of eukaryotic cells. We showed that grp94 is released from baby hamster kidney (BHK-21) cells into a serum-free medium. The exit of grp94 into the medium was not related to the protein discharge due to cell death and was independent of de novo protein synthesis. The treatment of cells with brefeldin A and monensin, the inhibitors of the classical pathway of protein secretion, did not decrease the extracellular level of grp94, indicating that the discharge of grp94 from cells does not occur through the ER/Golgi-dependent pathway. Exosomes, membrane vesicles secreted by several cell types, were not involved in the release of grp94 from cells. Methyl-?-cyclodextrin, a substance that disrupts the lipid raft organization, considerably reduced the extracellular level of grp94, indicating that lipid rafts are involved in the liberation of grp94 from BHK-21 cells. The results suggest that BHK-21 cells release grp94 into the serum-free medium via the nonclassical secretory pathway in which lipid rafts play an important role. (hide) EV-METRIC 0% (median: 14% 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 Cell culture supernatant Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles 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 Protein markers EV: non-EV: Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Other/Release of grp94 Sample Species Mesocricetus auratus Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium serum free Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 300 Characterization: Particle analysis None

	EV120125	1/1	Mus musculus	NAY	(d)(U)C Filtration	Eldh M	2012	0%
Study summary Full title Importance of RNA isolation methods for analysis of exosomal RNA: evaluation of different methods All authors Eldh M, Lötvall J, Malmhäll C, Ekström K Journal Mol Immunol Abstract Exosomes are small RNA containing vesicles of endocytic origin, which can take part in cell-to-cell (show more...)Exosomes are small RNA containing vesicles of endocytic origin, which can take part in cell-to-cell communication partly by the transfer of exosomal RNA between cells. Exosomes are released by many cells and can also be found in several biological fluids including blood plasma and breast milk. Exosomes differ compared to their donor cells not only in size but also in RNA, protein and lipid composition. The aim of the current study was to determine the optimal RNA extraction method for analysis of exosomal RNA, to support future studies determining the biological roles of the exosomal RNA. Different methods were used to extract exosomal and cellular RNA. All methods evaluated extracted high quality and purity RNA as determined by RNA integrity number (RIN) and OD values for cellular RNA using capillary electrophoresis and spectrophotometer. Interestingly, the exosomal RNA yield differed substantially between the different RNA isolation methods. There was also a difference in the exosomal RNA patterns in the electropherograms, indicating that the tested methods extract exosomal RNA with different size distribution. A pure column based approach resulted in the highest RNA yield and the broadest RNA size distribution, whereas phenol and combined phenol and column based approaches lost primarily large RNAs. Moreover, the use of phenol and combined techniques resulted in reduced yield of exosomal RNA, with a more narrow size distribution pattern resulting in an enrichment of small RNA including microRNA. In conclusion, the current study presents a unique comparison of seven different methods for extraction of exosomal RNA. As the different isolation methods give extensive variation in exosomal RNA yield and patterns, it is crucial to select an isolation approach depending on the research question at hand. (hide) EV-METRIC 0% (median: 14% 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 Cell culture supernatant Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles exosomes 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 no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Mus musculus Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium EV Depleted Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation 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 performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 70 Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Characterization: Particle analysis None

	EV120124	1/1	Homo sapiens	NAY	(d)(U)C DC	Donker RB	2012	0%
Study summary Full title The expression profile of C19MC microRNAs in primary human trophoblast cells and exosomes All authors Donker RB, Mouillet JF, Chu T, Hubel CA, Stolz DB, Morelli AE, Sadovsky Y Journal Mol Hum Reprod Abstract The largest gene cluster of human microRNAs (miRNAs), the chromosome 19 miRNA cluster (C19MC), is ex (show more...)The largest gene cluster of human microRNAs (miRNAs), the chromosome 19 miRNA cluster (C19MC), is exclusively expressed in the placenta and in undifferentiated cells. The precise expression pattern and function of C19MC members are unknown. We sought to profile the relative expression of C19MC miRNAs in primary human trophoblast (PHT) cells and exosomes. Using high-throughput profiling, confirmed by PCR, we found that C19MC miRNAs are among the most abundant miRNAs in term human trophoblasts. Hypoxic stress selectively reduced miR-520c-3p expression at certain time-points with no effect on other C19MC miRNAs. Similarly, differentiation in vitro had a negligible effect on C19MC miRNAs. We found that C19MC miRNAs are the predominant miRNA species expressed in exosomes released from PHT, resembling the profile of trophoblastic cellular miRNA. Predictably, we detected the similar levels of circulating C19MC miRNAs in the serum of healthy pregnant women at term and in women with pregnancies complicated by fetal growth restriction. Our data define the relative expression levels of C19MC miRNAs in trophoblasts and exosomes, and suggest that C19MC miRNAs function in placental-maternal signaling. (hide) EV-METRIC 0% (median: 14% 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 Cell culture supernatant Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles exosomes 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 DC Protein markers EV: TSG101 non-EV: Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Omics Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium EV Depleted Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 60 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Antibody details provided? No Detected EV-associated proteins TSG101 Characterization: Particle analysis EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Wide-field

	EV120112	4/4	Equus caballus	Serum	(d)(U)C ExoQuick	da Silveira JC	2012	0%
Study summary Full title Cell-secreted vesicles in equine ovarian follicular fluid contain miRNAs and proteins: a possible new form of cell communication within the ovarian follicle All authors da Silveira JC, Veeramachaneni DN, Winger QA, Carnevale EM, Bouma GJ Journal Biol Reprod Abstract Proper cell communication within the ovarian follicle is critical for the growth and maturation of a (show more...)Proper cell communication within the ovarian follicle is critical for the growth and maturation of a healthy oocyte that can be fertilized and develop into an embryo. Cell communication within the follicle involves many signaling molecules and is affected by maternal age. Recent studies indicate that cell communication can be mediated through secretion and uptake of small membrane-enclosed vesicles. The goals of this study were to 1) identify cell-secreted vesicles (microvesicles and exosomes) containing miRNAs and proteins within ovarian follicular fluid and 2) determine if miRNA level differs in exosomes isolated from follicular fluid in young compared to old mares. We demonstrate the presence of vesicles resembling microvesicles and exosomes in ovarian follicular fluid using transmission electron microscopy and CD63-positive and RNA containing vesicles using flow cytometry. Moreover, proteomics analysis reveals that follicular fluid-isolated exosomes contain both known exosomal proteins and proteins not previously reported in isolated exosomes. MicroRNAs were detected in microvesicle and exosomes preparations isolated from follicular fluid by real-time PCR analysis. Uptake of fluorescent-labeled microvesicles by granulosa cells was examined using in vitro and in vivo approaches. MicroRNA expression profiling reveals that miRNAs in microvesicle and exosome preparations isolated from follicular fluid also are present within surrounding granulosa and cumulus cells. These studies revealed that cell communication within the mammalian ovarian follicle may involve transfer of bioactive material by microvesicles and exosomes. Finally, miRNAs present in exosomes from ovarian follicular fluid varied with the age of the mare, and a number of different miRNAs were detected in young vs. old mare follicular fluid. (hide) EV-METRIC 0% (median: 13% 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 Serum Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles Vesicles 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 ExoQuick Protein markers EV: non-EV: Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Omics Sample Species Equus caballus Sample Type Serum Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 800 g and 10,000 g Pelleting performed No Commercial kit ExoQuick Other Name other separation method ExoQuick Characterization: Particle analysis None

	EV120120	2/2	Homo sapiens	Serum	ExoQuick	Corcoran C	2012	0%
Study summary Full title Docetaxel-resistance in prostate cancer: evaluating associated phenotypic changes and potential for resistance transfer via exosomes All authors Corcoran C, Rani S, O'Brien K, O'Neill A, Prencipe M, Sheikh R, Webb G, McDermott R, Watson W, Crown J, O'Driscoll L Journal PLoS One Abstract BACKGROUND: Hormone-refractory prostate cancer remains hindered by inevitable progression of resista (show more...)BACKGROUND: Hormone-refractory prostate cancer remains hindered by inevitable progression of resistance to first-line treatment with docetaxel. Recent studies suggest that phenotypic changes associated with cancer may be transferred from cell-to-cell via microvesicles/exosomes. Here we aimed to investigate phenotypic changes associated with docetaxel-resistance in order to help determine the complexity of this problem and to assess the relevance of secreted exosomes in prostate cancer. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Docetaxel-resistant variants of DU145 and 22Rv1 were established and characterised in terms of cross-resistance, morphology, proliferation, motility, invasion, anoikis, colony formation, exosomes secretion their and functional relevance. Preliminary analysis of exosomes from relevant serum specimens was also performed. Acquired docetaxel-resistance conferred cross-resistance to doxorubicin and induced alterations in motility, invasion, proliferation and anchorage-independent growth. Exosomes expelled from DU145 and 22Rv1 docetaxel-resistant variants (DU145RD and 22Rv1RD) conferred docetaxel-resistance to DU145, 22Rv1 and LNCap cells, which may be partly due to exosomal MDR-1/P-gp transfer. Exosomes from prostate cancer patients' sera induced increased cell proliferation and invasion, compared to exosomes from age-matched controls. Furthermore, exosomes from sera of patients undergoing a course of docetaxel treatment compared to matched exosomes from the same patients prior to commencing docetaxel treatment, when applied to both DU145 and 22Rv1 cells, showed a correlation between cellular response to docetaxel and patients' response to treatment with docetaxel. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Our studies indicate the complex and multifaceted nature of docetaxel-resistance in prostate cancer. Furthermore, our in vitro observations and preliminary clinical studies indicate that exosomes may play an important role in prostate cancer, in cell-cell communication, and thus may offer potential as vehicles containing predictive biomarkers and new therapeutic targets. (hide) EV-METRIC 0% (median: 13% 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 Serum Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles exosomes 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 ExoQuick Protein markers EV: Alix/ TSG101 non-EV: Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Function Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Serum Separation Method Commercial kit ExoQuick Other Name other separation method ExoQuick Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Antibody details provided? No Detected EV-associated proteins Alix/ TSG101 Characterization: Particle analysis None

	EV120118	1/2	Rattus norvegicus/rattus	Urine	(d)(U)C Filtration	Cheng Y	2012	0%
Study summary Full title A translational study of urine miRNAs in acute myocardial infarction All authors Cheng Y, Wang X, Yang J, Duan X, Yao Y, Shi X, Chen Z, Fan Z, Liu X, Qin S, Tang X, Zhang C Journal J Mol Cell Cardiol Abstract The currently used biomarkers for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) are blood creatinine phosphokina (show more...)The currently used biomarkers for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) are blood creatinine phosphokinase-muscle band (CPK-MB), troponin-T (TnT), and troponin I (TnI). However, no good biomarkers are identified in urine after AMI, because these blood protein biomarkers are difficult to be filtered into urine. In this study, the role of urine microRNAs in the diagnosis of AMI and the mechanism involved were determined. We found that urine miR-1 was quickly increased in rats after AMI with peak at 24h after AMI, in which an over 50-fold increase was demonstrated. At 7 days after AMI, the urine miR-1 level was returned to the basal level. No miR-208 was found in normal urine. In urine from rats with AMI, miR-208 was easily detected. To determine the mechanism involved, we determined the levels of heart-released miR-1 in the liver, spleen and kidney after AMI in rats and found that the kidney was an important metabolic organ. To determine the renal elimination of blood miRNAs, we isolated serum exosomes from rats after AMI and injected these exosomes into the circulating blood of normal rats. We found that the urine miR-1 was significantly increased in exosome-injected animals. Moreover, PKH67-labeled exosomes injected into circulating blood could enter into the kidney tissues and cells, as well as urine. Furthermore, the levels of urine miR-1 were significantly increased in patients with AMI. The results suggest that urine miRNAs such as miR-1 could be novel urine biomarkers for AMI. (hide) EV-METRIC 0% (median: 22% 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 Urine Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles 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 no Show all info Study aim Biomarker Sample Species Rattus norvegicus/rattus Sample Type Urine Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 120 Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Characterization: Particle analysis EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Close-up

	EV120118	2/2	Rattus norvegicus/rattus	Serum	(d)(U)C Filtration	Cheng Y	2012	0%
Study summary Full title A translational study of urine miRNAs in acute myocardial infarction All authors Cheng Y, Wang X, Yang J, Duan X, Yao Y, Shi X, Chen Z, Fan Z, Liu X, Qin S, Tang X, Zhang C Journal J Mol Cell Cardiol Abstract The currently used biomarkers for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) are blood creatinine phosphokina (show more...)The currently used biomarkers for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) are blood creatinine phosphokinase-muscle band (CPK-MB), troponin-T (TnT), and troponin I (TnI). However, no good biomarkers are identified in urine after AMI, because these blood protein biomarkers are difficult to be filtered into urine. In this study, the role of urine microRNAs in the diagnosis of AMI and the mechanism involved were determined. We found that urine miR-1 was quickly increased in rats after AMI with peak at 24h after AMI, in which an over 50-fold increase was demonstrated. At 7 days after AMI, the urine miR-1 level was returned to the basal level. No miR-208 was found in normal urine. In urine from rats with AMI, miR-208 was easily detected. To determine the mechanism involved, we determined the levels of heart-released miR-1 in the liver, spleen and kidney after AMI in rats and found that the kidney was an important metabolic organ. To determine the renal elimination of blood miRNAs, we isolated serum exosomes from rats after AMI and injected these exosomes into the circulating blood of normal rats. We found that the urine miR-1 was significantly increased in exosome-injected animals. Moreover, PKH67-labeled exosomes injected into circulating blood could enter into the kidney tissues and cells, as well as urine. Furthermore, the levels of urine miR-1 were significantly increased in patients with AMI. The results suggest that urine miRNAs such as miR-1 could be novel urine biomarkers for AMI. (hide) EV-METRIC 0% (median: 13% 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 Serum Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles 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 no Show all info Study aim Biomarker Sample Species Rattus norvegicus/rattus Sample Type Serum Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 120 Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Characterization: Particle analysis EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Close-up

	EV120117	1/1	Mus musculus	NAY	(d)(U)C IAF	Castro-Seoane R	2012	0%
Study summary Full title Plasmacytoid dendritic cells sequester high prion titres at early stages of prion infection All authors Castro-Seoane R, Hummerich H, Sweeting T, Tattum MH, Linehan JM, Fernandez de Marco M, Brandner S, Collinge J, Klöhn PC Journal PLoS Pathog Abstract In most transmissible spongiform encephalopathies prions accumulate in the lymphoreticular system (L (show more...)In most transmissible spongiform encephalopathies prions accumulate in the lymphoreticular system (LRS) long before they are detectable in the central nervous system. While a considerable body of evidence showed that B lymphocytes and follicular dendritic cells play a major role in prion colonization of lymphoid organs, the contribution of various other cell types, including antigen-presenting cells, to the accumulation and the spread of prions in the LRS are not well understood. A comprehensive study to compare prion titers of candidate cell types has not been performed to date, mainly due to limitations in the scope of animal bioassays where prohibitively large numbers of mice would be required to obtain sufficiently accurate data. By taking advantage of quantitative in vitro prion determination and magnetic-activated cell sorting, we studied the kinetics of prion accumulation in various splenic cell types at early stages of prion infection. Robust estimates for infectious titers were obtained by statistical modelling using a generalized linear model. Whilst prions were detectable in B and T lymphocytes and in antigen-presenting cells like dendritic cells and macrophages, highest infectious titers were determined in two cell types that have previously not been associated with prion pathogenesis, plasmacytoid dendritic (pDC) and natural killer (NK) cells. At 30 days after infection, NK cells were more than twice, and pDCs about seven-fold, as infectious as lymphocytes respectively. This result was unexpected since, in accordance to previous reports prion protein, an obligate requirement for prion replication, was undetectable in pDCs. This underscores the importance of prion sequestration and dissemination by antigen-presenting cells which are among the first cells of the immune system to encounter pathogens. We furthermore report the first evidence for a release of prions from lymphocytes and DCs of scrapie-infected mice ex vivo, a process that is associated with a release of exosome-like membrane vesicles. (hide) EV-METRIC 0% (median: 14% 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 Cell culture supernatant Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles 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 IAF Protein markers EV: non-EV: Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Other/Prion titers of different cell types Sample Species Mus musculus Sample Type Cell culture supernatant Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 120 Immunoaffinity capture Selected surface protein(s) CD81, Rab5b Characterization: Particle analysis EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Wide-field

	EV210010	1/4	Homo sapiens	Blood plasma	(d)(U)C Filtration UF	Bryant, R J	2012	0%
Study summary Full title Changes in circulating microRNA levels associated with prostate cancer All authors R J Bryant, T Pawlowski, J W F Catto, G Marsden, R L Vessella, B Rhees, C Kuslich, T Visakorpi, F C Hamdy Journal Br J Cancer Abstract Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the hypothesis that changes in circulating micr (show more...)Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the hypothesis that changes in circulating microRNAs (miRs) represent potentially useful biomarkers for the diagnosis, staging and prediction of outcome in prostate cancer. Methods: Real-time polymerase chain reaction analysis of 742 miRs was performed using plasma-derived circulating microvesicles of 78 prostate cancer patients and 28 normal control individuals to identify differentially quantified miRs. Results: A total of 12 miRs were differentially quantified in prostate cancer patients compared with controls, including 9 in patients without metastases. In all, 11 miRs were present in significantly greater amounts in prostate cancer patients with metastases compared with those without metastases. The association of miR-141 and miR-375 with metastatic prostate cancer was confirmed using serum-derived exosomes and microvesicles in a separate cohort of patients with recurrent or non-recurrent disease following radical prostatectomy. An analysis of five selected miRs in urine samples found that miR-107 and miR-574-3p were quantified at significantly higher concentrations in the urine of men with prostate cancer compared with controls. Conclusion: These observations suggest that changes in miR concentration in prostate cancer patients may be identified by analysing various body fluids. Moreover, circulating miRs may be used to diagnose and stage prostate cancer. (hide) EV-METRIC 0% (median: 22% 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 Blood plasma Sample origin Prostate cancer Focus vesicles Exosomes / (shedding) microvesicles 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 (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation Filtration Ultrafiltration Protein markers EV: None non-EV: None Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Biomarker Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Blood plasma Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 800 g and 10,000 g Pelleting performed No Filtration steps > 0.45 µm, Ultra filtration Cut-off size (kDa) 150 Membrane type Not specified Other Name other separation method Ultrafiltration Characterization: Protein analysis None Protein Concentration Method Not determined Characterization: RNA analysis RNA analysis Type Microarray; (RT)(q)PCR Proteinase treatment No RNAse treatment Yes Moment of RNAse treatment Before RNAse type RNase A RNAse concentration 0.003 Characterization: Lipid analysis No Characterization: Particle analysis None

	EV210010	2/4	Homo sapiens	Blood plasma	(d)(U)C Filtration UF	Bryant, R J	2012	0%
Study summary Full title Changes in circulating microRNA levels associated with prostate cancer All authors R J Bryant, T Pawlowski, J W F Catto, G Marsden, R L Vessella, B Rhees, C Kuslich, T Visakorpi, F C Hamdy Journal Br J Cancer Abstract Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the hypothesis that changes in circulating micr (show more...)Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the hypothesis that changes in circulating microRNAs (miRs) represent potentially useful biomarkers for the diagnosis, staging and prediction of outcome in prostate cancer. Methods: Real-time polymerase chain reaction analysis of 742 miRs was performed using plasma-derived circulating microvesicles of 78 prostate cancer patients and 28 normal control individuals to identify differentially quantified miRs. Results: A total of 12 miRs were differentially quantified in prostate cancer patients compared with controls, including 9 in patients without metastases. In all, 11 miRs were present in significantly greater amounts in prostate cancer patients with metastases compared with those without metastases. The association of miR-141 and miR-375 with metastatic prostate cancer was confirmed using serum-derived exosomes and microvesicles in a separate cohort of patients with recurrent or non-recurrent disease following radical prostatectomy. An analysis of five selected miRs in urine samples found that miR-107 and miR-574-3p were quantified at significantly higher concentrations in the urine of men with prostate cancer compared with controls. Conclusion: These observations suggest that changes in miR concentration in prostate cancer patients may be identified by analysing various body fluids. Moreover, circulating miRs may be used to diagnose and stage prostate cancer. (hide) EV-METRIC 0% (median: 22% 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 Blood plasma Sample origin Control Focus vesicles Exosomes / (shedding) microvesicles 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 (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation Filtration Ultrafiltration Protein markers EV: None non-EV: None Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Biomarker Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Blood plasma Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 800 g and 10,000 g Pelleting performed No Filtration steps > 0.45 µm, Ultra filtration Cut-off size (kDa) 150 Membrane type Not specified Other Name other separation method Ultrafiltration Characterization: Protein analysis None Protein Concentration Method Not determined Characterization: RNA analysis RNA analysis Type Microarray; (RT)(q)PCR Proteinase treatment No RNAse treatment Yes Moment of RNAse treatment Before RNAse type RNase A RNAse concentration 0.003 Characterization: Lipid analysis No Characterization: Particle analysis None

	EV210010	3/4	Homo sapiens	Serum	NA	Bryant, R J	2012	0%
Study summary Full title Changes in circulating microRNA levels associated with prostate cancer All authors R J Bryant, T Pawlowski, J W F Catto, G Marsden, R L Vessella, B Rhees, C Kuslich, T Visakorpi, F C Hamdy Journal Br J Cancer Abstract Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the hypothesis that changes in circulating micr (show more...)Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the hypothesis that changes in circulating microRNAs (miRs) represent potentially useful biomarkers for the diagnosis, staging and prediction of outcome in prostate cancer. Methods: Real-time polymerase chain reaction analysis of 742 miRs was performed using plasma-derived circulating microvesicles of 78 prostate cancer patients and 28 normal control individuals to identify differentially quantified miRs. Results: A total of 12 miRs were differentially quantified in prostate cancer patients compared with controls, including 9 in patients without metastases. In all, 11 miRs were present in significantly greater amounts in prostate cancer patients with metastases compared with those without metastases. The association of miR-141 and miR-375 with metastatic prostate cancer was confirmed using serum-derived exosomes and microvesicles in a separate cohort of patients with recurrent or non-recurrent disease following radical prostatectomy. An analysis of five selected miRs in urine samples found that miR-107 and miR-574-3p were quantified at significantly higher concentrations in the urine of men with prostate cancer compared with controls. Conclusion: These observations suggest that changes in miR concentration in prostate cancer patients may be identified by analysing various body fluids. Moreover, circulating miRs may be used to diagnose and stage prostate cancer. (hide) EV-METRIC 0% (median: 13% 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 Serum Sample origin Recurrent prostate cancer Focus vesicles Exosomes / (shedding) microvesicles 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 NA Protein markers EV: None non-EV: None Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Biomarker Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Serum Separation Method Commercial kit Other;ExoMiR Other Name other separation method NA Characterization: Protein analysis None Protein Concentration Method Not determined Characterization: RNA analysis RNA analysis Type (RT)(q)PCR Proteinase treatment No RNAse treatment Yes Moment of RNAse treatment Before RNAse type RNase A RNAse concentration 0.003 Characterization: Lipid analysis No Characterization: Particle analysis None

	EV210010	4/4	Homo sapiens	Serum	ExoMiR	Bryant, R J	2012	0%
Study summary Full title Changes in circulating microRNA levels associated with prostate cancer All authors R J Bryant, T Pawlowski, J W F Catto, G Marsden, R L Vessella, B Rhees, C Kuslich, T Visakorpi, F C Hamdy Journal Br J Cancer Abstract Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the hypothesis that changes in circulating micr (show more...)Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the hypothesis that changes in circulating microRNAs (miRs) represent potentially useful biomarkers for the diagnosis, staging and prediction of outcome in prostate cancer. Methods: Real-time polymerase chain reaction analysis of 742 miRs was performed using plasma-derived circulating microvesicles of 78 prostate cancer patients and 28 normal control individuals to identify differentially quantified miRs. Results: A total of 12 miRs were differentially quantified in prostate cancer patients compared with controls, including 9 in patients without metastases. In all, 11 miRs were present in significantly greater amounts in prostate cancer patients with metastases compared with those without metastases. The association of miR-141 and miR-375 with metastatic prostate cancer was confirmed using serum-derived exosomes and microvesicles in a separate cohort of patients with recurrent or non-recurrent disease following radical prostatectomy. An analysis of five selected miRs in urine samples found that miR-107 and miR-574-3p were quantified at significantly higher concentrations in the urine of men with prostate cancer compared with controls. Conclusion: These observations suggest that changes in miR concentration in prostate cancer patients may be identified by analysing various body fluids. Moreover, circulating miRs may be used to diagnose and stage prostate cancer. (hide) EV-METRIC 0% (median: 13% 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 Serum Sample origin Non-recurrent prostate cancer Focus vesicles Exosomes / (shedding) microvesicles 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 ExoMiR Protein markers EV: None non-EV: None Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Biomarker Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Serum Separation Method Commercial kit Other;ExoMiR Other Name other separation method ExoMiR Characterization: Protein analysis None Protein Concentration Method Not determined Characterization: RNA analysis RNA analysis Type (RT)(q)PCR Proteinase treatment No RNAse treatment Yes Moment of RNAse treatment Before RNAse type RNase A RNAse concentration 0.003 Characterization: Lipid analysis No Characterization: Particle analysis None

	EV120114	1/2	Mus musculus	Blood plasma	ExoQuick	Bala S	2012	0%
Study summary Full title Circulating microRNAs in exosomes indicate hepatocyte injury and inflammation in alcoholic, drug-induced, and inflammatory liver diseases All authors Bala S, Petrasek J, Mundkur S, Catalano D, Levin I, Ward J, Alao H, Kodys K, Szabo G Journal Hepatology Abstract MicroRNAs are fine tuners of diverse biological responses and are expressed in various cell types of (show more...)MicroRNAs are fine tuners of diverse biological responses and are expressed in various cell types of the liver. Here we hypothesized that circulating microRNAs (miRNAs) may serve as biomarkers of liver damage and inflammation. We studied miRNA-122, which is abundant in hepatocytes, and miR-155, -146a, and -125b, which regulate inflammation in immune cells in mouse models of alcoholic liver disease (ALD), drug (acetaminophen, APAP)-induced liver injury (DILI), and Toll-like receptor (TLR) 9+4 ligand-induced inflammatory cell-mediated liver damage. We found that serum/plasma miR-122 correlated with alanine aminotransferase (ALT) increases in the liver damage caused by alcohol, APAP, and TLR9 (CpG)+4 (LPS) ligands. MiR-155, a regulator of inflammation, was increased in serum/plasma in alcoholic and inflammatory liver injury. Alcohol failed to increase serum miR-122 in TLR4-deficient and p47phox-deficient mice that were protected from ALD. We found the most robust increase in plasma miR-122 in DILI and it correlated with the highest ALT levels. Consistent with the massive inflammatory cell infiltration in the liver, plasma miR-155 and miR-146a were significantly elevated after CpG+LPS administration. We show for the first time that, depending on the type of liver injury, circulating miRNAs are associated either with the exosome-rich or protein-rich compartments. In ALD and in inflammatory liver injury, serum/plasma miR-122 and miR-155 were predominantly associated with the exosome-rich fraction, whereas in DILI/APAP injury these miRNAs were present in the protein-rich fraction.CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that circulating miRNAs may serve as biomarkers to differentiate between hepatocyte injury and inflammation and the exosome versus protein association of miRNAs may provide further specificity to mechanisms of liver pathology. (hide) EV-METRIC 0% (median: 22% 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 Blood plasma Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles exosomes 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 ExoQuick Protein markers EV: CD81 non-EV: Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Biomarker Sample Species Mus musculus Sample Type Blood plasma Separation Method Commercial kit ExoQuick Other Name other separation method ExoQuick Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Antibody details provided? No Detected EV-associated proteins CD81 Characterization: Particle analysis None

	EV120114	2/2	Mus musculus	Serum	ExoQuick	Bala S	2012	0%
Study summary Full title Circulating microRNAs in exosomes indicate hepatocyte injury and inflammation in alcoholic, drug-induced, and inflammatory liver diseases All authors Bala S, Petrasek J, Mundkur S, Catalano D, Levin I, Ward J, Alao H, Kodys K, Szabo G Journal Hepatology Abstract MicroRNAs are fine tuners of diverse biological responses and are expressed in various cell types of (show more...)MicroRNAs are fine tuners of diverse biological responses and are expressed in various cell types of the liver. Here we hypothesized that circulating microRNAs (miRNAs) may serve as biomarkers of liver damage and inflammation. We studied miRNA-122, which is abundant in hepatocytes, and miR-155, -146a, and -125b, which regulate inflammation in immune cells in mouse models of alcoholic liver disease (ALD), drug (acetaminophen, APAP)-induced liver injury (DILI), and Toll-like receptor (TLR) 9+4 ligand-induced inflammatory cell-mediated liver damage. We found that serum/plasma miR-122 correlated with alanine aminotransferase (ALT) increases in the liver damage caused by alcohol, APAP, and TLR9 (CpG)+4 (LPS) ligands. MiR-155, a regulator of inflammation, was increased in serum/plasma in alcoholic and inflammatory liver injury. Alcohol failed to increase serum miR-122 in TLR4-deficient and p47phox-deficient mice that were protected from ALD. We found the most robust increase in plasma miR-122 in DILI and it correlated with the highest ALT levels. Consistent with the massive inflammatory cell infiltration in the liver, plasma miR-155 and miR-146a were significantly elevated after CpG+LPS administration. We show for the first time that, depending on the type of liver injury, circulating miRNAs are associated either with the exosome-rich or protein-rich compartments. In ALD and in inflammatory liver injury, serum/plasma miR-122 and miR-155 were predominantly associated with the exosome-rich fraction, whereas in DILI/APAP injury these miRNAs were present in the protein-rich fraction.CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that circulating miRNAs may serve as biomarkers to differentiate between hepatocyte injury and inflammation and the exosome versus protein association of miRNAs may provide further specificity to mechanisms of liver pathology. (hide) EV-METRIC 0% (median: 13% 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 Serum Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles exosomes 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 ExoQuick Protein markers EV: non-EV: Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Biomarker Sample Species Mus musculus Sample Type Serum Separation Method Commercial kit ExoQuick Other Name other separation method ExoQuick Characterization: Particle analysis None

	EV120113	1/1	Homo sapiens	NAY	(d)(U)C Filtration	Al-Mayah AH	2012	0%
Study summary Full title Possible role of exosomes containing RNA in mediating nontargeted effect of ionizing radiation All authors Al-Mayah AH, Irons SL, Pink RC, Carter DR, Kadhim MA Journal Radiat Res Abstract Communication between irradiated and un-irradiated (bystander) cells can cause damage in cells that (show more...)Communication between irradiated and un-irradiated (bystander) cells can cause damage in cells that are not directly targeted by ionizing radiation, a process known as the bystander effect. Bystander effects can also lead to chromosomal/genomic instability within the progeny of bystander cells, similar to the progeny of directly irradiated cells. The factors that mediate this cellular communication can be transferred between cells via gap junctions or released into the extracellular media following irradiation, but their nature has not been fully characterized. In this study we tested the hypothesis that the bystander effect mediator contains an RNA molecule that may be carried by exosomes. MCF7 cells were irradiated with 2 Gy of X rays and the extracellular media was harvested. RNase treatment abrogated the ability of the media to induce early and late chromosomal damage in bystander cells. Furthermore, treatment of bystander cells with exosomes isolated from this media increased the levels of genomic damage. These results suggest that the bystander effect, and genomic instability, are at least in part mediated by exosomes and implicate a role for RNA. (hide) EV-METRIC 0% (median: 14% 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 Cell culture supernatant Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles exosomes 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 no Show all info Study aim Function Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 90 Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Characterization: Particle analysis EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Wide-field

				251 - 268 of 268

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data