EV-TRACK

Search > Results

You searched for: 2015 (Year of publication)

Showing 1 - 50 of 178

Results list Most used separation protocols Top EV-enriched proteins

Details	EV-TRACK ID	Experiment nr.	Species	Sample type	separation protocol	First author	Year	EV-METRIC
	EV150108	1/4	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	dUC Filtration	Tosar JP	2015	67%
Study summary Full title Assessment of small RNA sorting into different extracellular fractions revealed by high-throughput sequencing of breast cell lines. All authors Tosar JP, Gámbaro F, Sanguinetti J, Bonilla B, Witwer KW, Cayota A. Journal Nucleic Acids Res Abstract Intercellular communication can be mediated by extracellular small regulatory RNAs (sRNAs). Circulat (show more...)Intercellular communication can be mediated by extracellular small regulatory RNAs (sRNAs). Circulating sRNAs are being intensively studied for their promising use as minimally invasive disease biomarkers. To date, most attention is centered on exosomes and microRNAs as the vectors and the secreted species, respectively. However, this field would benefit from an increased understanding of the plethora of sRNAs secreted by different cell types in different extracellular fractions. It is still not clear if specific sRNAs are selected for secretion, or if sRNA secretion is mostly passive. We sequenced the intracellular sRNA content (19-60 nt) of breast epithelial cell lines (MCF-7 and MCF-10A) and compared it with extracellular fractions enriched in microvesicles, exosomes and ribonucleoprotein complexes. Our results are consistent with a non-selective secretion model for most microRNAs, although a few showed secretion patterns consistent with preferential secretion. On the contrary, 5' tRNA halves and 5' RNA Y4-derived fragments of 31-33 were greatly and significantly enriched in the extracellular space (even in non-mammary cell lines), where tRNA halves were detected as part of ∼45 kDa ribonucleoprotein complexes. Overall, we show that different sRNA families have characteristic secretion patterns and open the question of the role of these sRNAs in the extracellular space. (hide) EV-METRIC 67% (94th 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 Cell culture supernatant Sample origin Control condition Focus vesicles extracellular vesicle 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 dUC + Filtration Protein markers EV: TSG101/ CD63/ CD9 non-EV: Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Biogenesis/cargo sorting/Identification of content (omics approaches) Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant Sample Condition Control condition EV-producing cells MCF-7 EV-harvesting Medium Serum free medium Cell viability Yes Cell viability (%) Yes 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: time(min) 150 Pelleting: rotor type SW 40 Ti Pelleting: speed (g) 100000 Wash: volume per pellet (ml) 7 Wash: time (min) 150 Wash: Rotor Type SW 40 Ti Wash: speed (g) 100000 Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Characterization: Protein analysis Protein Concentration Method BCA Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins CD9/ CD63/ TSG101 Characterization: RNA analysis Proteinase treatment Moment of Proteinase treatment After Proteinase type Proteinase K Proteinase concentration 64 RNAse treatment Moment of RNAse treatment After RNAse type RNase A RNAse concentration 4U/mL Characterization: Particle analysis NA DLS Report type Not Reported NTA Report type Not Reported EM EM-type Transmission-EM Image type Close-up, Wide-field

	EV150009	1/1	Homo sapiens	Placental perfusate	dUC Filtration	Dragovic RA	2015	67%
Study summary Full title Isolation of syncytiotrophoblast microvesicles and exosomes and their characterisation by multicolour flow cytometry and fluorescence Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis All authors Dragovic RA, Collett GP, Hole P, Ferguson DJ, Redman CW, Sargent IL, Tannetta DS Journal Methods Abstract The human placenta releases multiple types and sizes of syncytiotrophoblast (STB) extracellular vesi (show more...)The human placenta releases multiple types and sizes of syncytiotrophoblast (STB) extracellular vesicles (EV) into the maternal circulation that exhibit diverse biological activities. The placental perfusion technique enables isolation of these STBEV, but conventional flow cytometry can only be used to phenotype EV down to ?300nm in size. Fluorescence Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis (fl-NTA) has the potential to phenotype EV down to ?50nm, thereby improving current characterisation techniques. The aims of this study were to prepare microvesicle and exosome enriched fractions from human placental perfusate (n=8) and improve fl-NTA STBEV detection. Differential centrifugation and filtration effectively removed contaminating red blood cells from fresh placental perfusates and pelleted a STB microvesicle (STBMV) fraction (10,000×g pellet - 10KP; NTA modal size 395±12nm), enriched for the STB marker placental alkaline phosphatase (PLAP) and a STB exosome (STBEX) fraction (150,000×g pellet - 150KP; NTA modal size 147±6nm), enriched for PLAP and exosome markers Alix and CD63. The PLAP positivity of standard 10KP and 150KP pools (four samples/pool), determined by immunobead depletion, was used to optimise fl-NTA camera settings. Individual 10KP and 150KP samples (n=8) were 54.5±5.7% (range 17.8-66.9%) and 30.6±5.6% (range 3.3-51.7%) PLAP positive, respectively. We have developed a reliable method for enriching STBMV and STBEX from placental perfusate. We also standardised fl-NTA settings and improved measurement of PLAP positive EV in STBMV. However, fl-NTA is not as sensitive as anti-PLAP Dynabead capture for STBEX detection, possibly due to STBEX having lower surface expression of PLAP. These important developments will facilitate more detailed studies of the role of STBMV and STBEX in normal and pathological pregnancies. (hide) EV-METRIC 67% (83rd 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 Placental perfusate Sample origin DNF Focus vesicles exosomes / 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 dUC + Filtration Adj. k-factor 162 (pelleting) Protein markers EV: Alix/ CD63 non-EV: CD45/ CD235a/b/ CD41 Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Placental perfusate 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: time(min) 120 Pelleting: rotor type TST28.39 Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 162.0 Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins Alix/ CD63 Detected contaminants CD41/ CD235a/b/ CD45 Characterization: Particle analysis NA NTA EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Wide-field

	EV150004	1/2	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	DG dUC	Clark DJ	2015	67%
Study summary Full title Redefining the Breast Cancer Exosome Proteome by Tandem Mass Tag Quantitative Proteomics and Multivariate Cluster Analysis All authors Clark DJ, Fondrie WE, Liao Z, Hanson PI, Fulton A, Mao L, Yang AJ Journal Anal Chem Abstract Exosomes are microvesicles of endocytic origin constitutively released by multiple cell types into t (show more...)Exosomes are microvesicles of endocytic origin constitutively released by multiple cell types into the extracellular environment. With evidence that exosomes can be detected in the blood of patients with various malignancies, the development of a platform that uses exosomes as a diagnostic tool has been proposed. However, it has been difficult to truly define the exosome proteome due to the challenge of discerning contaminant proteins that may be identified via mass spectrometry using various exosome enrichment strategies. To better define the exosome proteome in breast cancer, we incorporated a combination of Tandem-Mass-Tag (TMT) quantitative proteomics approach and Support Vector Machine (SVM) cluster analysis of three conditioned media derived fractions corresponding to a 10 000g cellular debris pellet, a 100 000g crude exosome pellet, and an Optiprep enriched exosome pellet. The quantitative analysis identified 2 179 proteins in all three fractions, with known exosomal cargo proteins displaying at least a 2-fold enrichment in the exosome fraction based on the TMT protein ratios. Employing SVM cluster analysis allowed for the classification 251 proteins as true exosomal cargo proteins. This study provides a robust and vigorous framework for the future development of using exosomes as a potential multiprotein marker phenotyping tool that could be useful in breast cancer diagnosis and monitoring disease progression. (hide) EV-METRIC 67% (94th 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 Cell culture supernatant 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) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography DG + dUC Protein markers EV: Alix/ TSG101/ CD63 non-EV: Beta-actin/ Cell organelle protein Proteomics yes EV density (g/ml) 1.14-1.19 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: time(min) 70 Density gradient Only used for validation of main results 1 Density medium Iodixanol Lowest density fraction 5 Highest density fraction 40 Orientation Top-down Speed (g) 100000 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins Alix/ CD63/ TSG101 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein/ Beta-actin Characterization: Particle analysis NA EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Wide-field

	EV150008	1/1	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	DG dUC Filtration	Chan YK	2015	67%
Study summary Full title Proteomic analysis of exosomes from nasopharyngeal carcinoma cell identifies intercellular transfer of angiogenic proteins All authors Chan YK, Zhang H, Liu P, Tsao SW, Lung ML, Mak NK, Ngok-Shun Wong R, Ying-Kit Yue P Journal Int J Cancer Abstract Exosomes, a group of secreted extracellular nanovesicles containing genetic materials and signaling (show more...)Exosomes, a group of secreted extracellular nanovesicles containing genetic materials and signaling molecules, play a critical role in intercellular communication. During tumorigenesis, exosomes have been demonstrated to promote tumor angiogenesis and metastasis while their biological functions in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) are poorly understood. In this study, we focused on the role of NPC-derived exosomes on angiogenesis. Exosomes derived from the NPC C666-1 cells and immortalized nasopharyngeal epithelial cells (NP69 and NP460) were isolated using ultracentrifugation. The molecular profile and biophysical characteristics of exosomes were verified by Western blotting, sucrose density gradient and electron microscopy. We showed that the C666-1 exosomes (10 and 20 ?g/ml) could significantly increase the tubulogenesis, migration and invasion of human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) in a dose-dependent manner. Subsequently, an iTRAQ-based quantitative proteomics was used to identify the differentially expressed proteins in C666-1 exosomes. Among the 640 identified proteins, 51 and 89 proteins were considered as up- and down-regulated (? 1.5-fold variations) in C666-1 exosomes compared to the normal counterparts, respectively. As expected, pro-angiogenic proteins including intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1) and CD44 variant isoform 5 (CD44v5) are among the up-regulated proteins, whereas angio-suppressive protein, thrombospondin-1 (TSP-1) was down-regulated in C666-1 exosomes. Further confocal microscopic study and Western blotting clearly demonstrated that the alteration of ICAM-1 and TSP-1 expressions in recipient HUVECs are due to internalization of exosomes. Taken together, these data strongly indicated the critical roles of identified angiogenic proteins in the involvement of exosomes-induced angiogenesis, which could potentially be developed as therapeutic targets in future. (hide) EV-METRIC 67% (94th 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 Cell culture supernatant 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) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography DG + dUC + Filtration Adj. k-factor 156.9 (pelleting) Protein markers EV: CD63/ CD9 non-EV: Cell organelle protein Proteomics yes EV density (g/ml) 1.17-1.19 Show all info Study aim Function 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: time(min) 120 Pelleting: rotor type 70Ti Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 156.9 Density gradient Only used for validation of main results 1 Density medium Sucrose Lowest density fraction 0.2 M Highest density fraction 2.5 M Orientation Top-down Rotor type 90Ti Speed (g) 100000 Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins CD63/ CD9 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein Characterization: Particle analysis NA TRPS EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Wide-field

	EV150034	2/2	Homo sapiens	Blood plasma	dUC	de Menezes-Neto A	2015	57%
Study summary Full title Size-exclusion chromatography as a stand-alone methodology identifies novel markers in mass spectrometry analyses of plasma-derived vesicles from healthy individuals All authors de Menezes-Neto A, Sáez MJ, Lozano-Ramos I, Segui-Barber J, Martin-Jaular L, Ullate JM, Fernandez-Becerra C, Borrás FE, Del Portillo HA Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract Plasma-derived vesicles hold a promising potential for use in biomedical applications. Two major cha (show more...)Plasma-derived vesicles hold a promising potential for use in biomedical applications. Two major challenges, however, hinder their implementation into translational tools: (a) the incomplete characterization of the protein composition of plasma-derived vesicles, in the size range of exosomes, as mass spectrometric analysis of plasma sub-components is recognizably troublesome and (b) the limited reach of vesicle-based studies in settings where the infrastructural demand of ultracentrifugation, the most widely used isolation/purification methodology, is not available. In this study, we have addressed both challenges by carrying-out mass spectrometry (MS) analyses of plasma-derived vesicles, in the size range of exosomes, from healthy donors obtained by 2 alternative methodologies: size-exclusion chromatography (SEC) on sepharose columns and Exo-Spin™. No exosome markers, as opposed to the most abundant plasma proteins, were detected by Exo-Spin™. In contrast, exosomal markers were present in the early fractions of SEC where the most abundant plasma proteins have been largely excluded. Noticeably, after a cross-comparative analysis of all published studies using MS to characterize plasma-derived exosomes from healthy individuals, we also observed a paucity of classical exosome markers. Independent of the isolation method, however, we consistently identified 2 proteins, CD5 antigen-like (CD5L) and galectin-3-binding protein (LGALS3BP), whose presence was validated by a bead-exosome FACS assay. Altogether, our results support the use of SEC as a stand-alone methodology to obtain preparations of extracellular vesicles, in the size range of exosomes, from plasma and suggest the use of CD5L and LGALS3BP as more suitable markers of plasma-derived vesicles in MS. (hide) EV-METRIC 57% (94th 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 Blood plasma Sample origin DNF 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 dUC Protein markers EV: CD81/ GAPDH/ CD9 non-EV: Albumin Proteomics yes Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Blood plasma Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins GAPDH ELISA Detected EV-associated proteins GAPDH Characterization: Particle analysis NA NTA EM EM-type immune EM/ cryo EM Proteïns CD5L Image type Close-up

	EV150106	1/1	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	DG dUC	van Balkom BW	2015	56%
Study summary Full title Quantitative and qualitative analysis of small RNAs in human endothelial cells and exosomes provides insights into localized RNA processing, degradation and sorting. All authors van Balkom BW, Eisele AS, Pegtel DM, Bervoets S, Verhaar MC. Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract Exosomes are small vesicles that mediate cell-cell communication. They contain proteins, lipids and (show more...)Exosomes are small vesicles that mediate cell-cell communication. They contain proteins, lipids and RNA, and evidence is accumulating that these molecules are specifically sorted for release via exosomes. We recently showed that endothelial-cell-produced exosomes promote angiogenesis in vivo in a small RNA-dependent manner. Recent deep sequencing studies in exosomes from lymphocytic origin revealed a broad spectrum of small RNAs. However, selective depletion or incorporation of small RNA species into endothelial exosomes has not been studied extensively. With next generation sequencing, we identified all known non-coding RNA classes, including microRNAs (miRNAs), small nucleolar RNAs, yRNAs, vault RNAs, 5p and 3p fragments of miRNAs and miRNA-like fragments. In addition, we mapped many fragments of messenger RNAs (mRNAs) and mitochondrial RNAs (mtRNAs). The distribution of small RNAs in exosomes revealed a considerable overlap with the distribution in the producing cells. However, we identified a remarkable enrichment of yRNA fragments and mRNA degradation products in exosomes consistent with yRNAs having a role in degradation of structured and misfolded RNAs in close proximity to endosomes. We propose that endothelial endosomes selectively sequester cytoplasmic RNA-degrading machineries taking part in gene regulation. The release of these regulatory RNAs via exosomes may have implications for endothelial cell-cell communication. (hide) EV-METRIC 56% (88th 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 Cell culture supernatant Sample origin Control condition Focus vesicles exosome 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 DG + dUC Protein markers EV: GAPDH/ Flotillin1/ CD9/ non-EV: Histone H2A.X/ Lamin A / C/ ATP5A/ Tom20 Proteomics no EV density (g/ml) 1.07 - 1.12 Show all info Study aim Identification of content (omics approaches) Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant Sample Condition Control condition EV-producing cells HMEC-1 EV-harvesting Medium EV-depleted medium Preparation of EDS 1h at 200000g Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Pelleting: time(min) 60 Pelleting: rotor type Not specified Pelleting: speed (g) 100000 Wash: time (min) 60 Wash: Rotor Type Not specified Wash: speed (g) 100000 Density gradient Only used for validation of main results Yes Density medium Sucrose Type Continuous Lowest density fraction 0.25M Highest density fraction 2.0M Sample volume (mL) 0.25 Orientation Bottom-up Rotor type Not specified Speed (g) 190000 Duration (min) 960 Fraction volume (mL) 0.4 Fraction processing None Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins GAPDH/ Flotillin1/ CD9 Not detected contaminants Lamin A/C/ Histone H2A.X/ ATP5A/ Tom20 NA EM EM-type Transmission-EM Image type Wide-field

	EV150003	1/2	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	dUC	Saari H	2015	56%
Study summary Full title Microvesicle- and exosome-mediated drug delivery enhances the cytotoxicity of Paclitaxel in autologous prostate cancer cells All authors Saari H, Lázaro-Ibáñez E, Viitala T, Vuorimaa-Laukkanen E, Siljander P, Yliperttula M Journal J Control Release Abstract BACKGROUND: Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are naturally occurring membrane particles that mediate int (show more...)BACKGROUND: Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are naturally occurring membrane particles that mediate intercellular communication by delivering molecular information between cells. In this study, we investigated the effectiveness of two different populations of EVs (microvesicle- and exosome-enriched) as carriers of Paclitaxel to autologous prostate cancer cells. METHODS: EVs were isolated from LNCaP- and PC-3 prostate cancer cell cultures using differential centrifugation and characterized by electron microscopy, nanoparticle tracking analysis, and Western blot. The uptake of microvesicles and exosomes by the autologous prostate cancer cells was assessed by flow cytometry and confocal microscopy. The EVs were loaded with Paclitaxel and the effectiveness of EV-mediated drug delivery was assessed with viability assays. The distribution of EVs and EV-delivered Paclitaxel in cells was inspected by confocal microscopy. RESULTS: Our main finding was that the loading of Paclitaxel to autologous prostate cancer cell-derived EVs increased its cytotoxic effect. This capacity was independent of the EV population and the cell line tested. Although the EVs without the drug increased cancer cell viability, the net effect of enhanced cytotoxicity remained. Both EV populations delivered Paclitaxel to the recipient cells through endocytosis, leading to the release of the drug from within the cells. The removal of EV surface proteins did not affect exosomes, while the drug delivery mediated by microvesicles was partially inhibited. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer cell-derived EVs can be used as effective carriers of Paclitaxel to their parental cells, bringing the drug into the cells through an endocytic pathway and increasing its cytotoxicity. However, due to the increased cell viability, the use of cancer cell-derived EVs must be further investigated before any clinical applications can be designed. (hide) EV-METRIC 56% (88th 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 Cell culture supernatant Sample origin DNF Focus vesicles exosomes / 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 dUC Adj. k-factor 52.47 (washing) Protein markers EV: CD81/ Alpha-tubulin/ TSG101/ CD63/ CD9 non-EV: GAPDH Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Function Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium EV Depleted Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Equal to or above 150,000 g Pelleting: time(min) 60 Wash: volume per pellet (ml) 1 Wash: Rotor Type TLA55 Wash: adjusted k-factor 52.47 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins CD63/ CD81/ CD9/ TSG101/ Alpha-tubulin Detected contaminants GAPDH ELISA Detected EV-associated proteins Alpha-tubulin Characterization: Particle analysis NA NTA EM EM-type transmission EM/ cryo EM Image type Close-up

	EV150016	2/2	Homo sapiens	Ascites	dUC Filtration	Pospichalova V	2015	56%
Study summary Full title Simplified protocol for flow cytometry analysis of fluorescently labeled exosomes and microvesicles using dedicated flow cytometer All authors Pospichalova V, Svoboda J, Dave Z, Kotrbova A, Kaiser K, Klemova D, Ilkovics L, Hampl A, Crha I, Jandakova E, Minar L, Weinberger V, Bryja V Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract Flow cytometry is a powerful method, which is widely used for high-throughput quantitative and quali (show more...)Flow cytometry is a powerful method, which is widely used for high-throughput quantitative and qualitative analysis of cells. However, its straightforward applicability for extracellular vesicles (EVs) and mainly exosomes is hampered by several challenges, reflecting mostly the small size of these vesicles (exosomes: ~80-200 nm, microvesicles: ~200-1,000 nm), their polydispersity, and low refractive index. The current best and most widely used protocol for beads-free flow cytometry of exosomes uses ultracentrifugation (UC) coupled with floatation in sucrose gradient for their isolation, labeling with lipophilic dye PKH67 and antibodies, and an optimized version of commercial high-end cytometer for analysis. However, this approach requires an experienced flow cytometer operator capable of manual hardware adjustments and calibration of the cytometer. Here, we provide a novel and fast approach for quantification and characterization of both exosomes and microvesicles isolated from cell culture media as well as from more complex human samples (ascites of ovarian cancer patients) suitable for multiuser labs by using a flow cytometer especially designed for small particles, which can be used without adjustments prior to data acquisition. EVs can be fluorescently labeled with protein-(Carboxyfluoresceinsuccinimidyl ester, CFSE) and/or lipid- (FM) specific dyes, without the necessity of removing the unbound fluorescent dye by UC, which further facilitates and speeds up the characterization of microvesicles and exosomes using flow cytometry. In addition, double labeling with protein- and lipid-specific dyes enables separation of EVs from common contaminants of EV preparations, such as protein aggregates or micelles formed by unbound lipophilic styryl dyes, thus not leading to overestimation of EV numbers. Moreover, our protocol is compatible with antibody labeling using fluorescently conjugated primary antibodies. The presented methodology opens the possibility for routine quantification and characterization of EVs from various sources. Finally, it has the potential to bring a desired level of control into routine experiments and non-specialized labs, thanks to its simple bead-based standardization. (hide) EV-METRIC 56% (97th 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 Ascites Sample origin DNF Focus vesicles exosomes / 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 dUC + Filtration Adj. k-factor 253.9 (pelleting) Protein markers EV: Alix/ HSP70/ TSG101/ CD63 non-EV: Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Ascites 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: time(min) 190 Pelleting: rotor type SW28 Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 253.9 Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins Alix/ CD63/ HSP70/ TSG101 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein Characterization: Particle analysis NA Particle analysis: flow cytometry EM EM-type transmission EM/ immune EM Proteïns CD63 Image type Close-up, Wide-field

	EV150002	1/1	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	DG dUC	Phinney DG	2015	56%
Study summary Full title Mesenchymal stem cells use extracellular vesicles to outsource mitophagy and shuttle microRNAs All authors Phinney DG, Di Giuseppe M, Njah J, Sala E, Shiva S, St Croix CM, Stolz DB, Watkins SC, Di YP, Leikauf GD, Kolls J, Riches DW, Deiuliis G, Kaminski N, Boregowda SV, McKenna DH, Ortiz LA Journal Nat Commun Abstract Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and macrophages are fundamental components of the stem cell niche and (show more...)Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and macrophages are fundamental components of the stem cell niche and function coordinately to regulate haematopoietic stem cell self-renewal and mobilization. Recent studies indicate that mitophagy and healthy mitochondrial function are critical to the survival of stem cells, but how these processes are regulated in MSCs is unknown. Here we show that MSCs manage intracellular oxidative stress by targeting depolarized mitochondria to the plasma membrane via arrestin domain-containing protein 1-mediated microvesicles. The vesicles are then engulfed and re-utilized via a process involving fusion by macrophages, resulting in enhanced bioenergetics. Furthermore, we show that MSCs simultaneously shed micro RNA-containing exosomes that inhibit macrophage activation by suppressing Toll-like receptor signalling, thereby de-sensitizing macrophages to the ingested mitochondria. Collectively, these studies mechanistically link mitophagy and MSC survival with macrophage function, thereby providing a physiologically relevant context for the innate immunomodulatory activity of MSCs. (hide) EV-METRIC 56% (88th 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 Cell culture supernatant Sample origin DNF Focus vesicles extracellular 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 DG + dUC Protein markers EV: CD63/ CD9/ MFGE8 non-EV: Proteomics no EV density (g/ml) 1.09-1.14 Show all info Study aim Function 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: time(min) 90 Density gradient Only used for validation of main results 1 Density medium Sucrose Lowest density fraction 0.25 Highest density fraction 2.5 Orientation Bottom-up Speed (g) 100000 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins CD63/ CD9/ MFGE8 ELISA Detected EV-associated proteins MFGE8 Characterization: Particle analysis NA NTA EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Wide-field

	EV150027	2/2	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	DG dUC Filtration	Kharaziha P	2015	56%
Study summary Full title Molecular profiling of prostate cancer derived exosomes may reveal a predictive signature for response to docetaxel All authors Kharaziha P, Chioureas D, Rutishauser D, Baltatzis G, Lennartsson L, Fonseca P, Azimi A, Hultenby K, Zubarev R, Ullén A, Yachnin J, Nilsson S, Panaretakis T Journal Oncotarget Abstract Docetaxel is a cornerstone treatment for metastatic, castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) whi (show more...)Docetaxel is a cornerstone treatment for metastatic, castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) which remains a leading cause of cancer-related deaths, worldwide. The clinical usage of docetaxel has resulted in modest gains in survival, primarily due to the development of resistance. There are currently no clinical biomarkers available that predict whether a CRPC patient will respond or acquire resistance to this therapy. Comparative proteomics analysis of exosomes secreted from DU145 prostate cancer cells that are sensitive (DU145 Tax-Sen) or have acquired resistance (DU145 Tax-Res) to docetaxel, demonstrated significant differences in the amount of exosomes secreted and in their molecular composition. A panel of proteins was identified by proteomics to be differentially enriched in DU145 Tax-Res compared to DU145 Tax-Sen exosomes and was validated by western blotting. Importantly, we identified MDR-1, MDR-3, Endophilin-A2 and PABP4 that were enriched only in DU145 Tax-Res exosomes. We validated the presence of these proteins in the serum of a small cohort of patients. DU145 cells that have uptaken DU145 Tax-Res exosomes show properties of increased matrix degradation. In summary, exosomes derived from DU145 Tax-Res cells may be a valuable source of biomarkers for response to therapy. (hide) EV-METRIC 56% (88th 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 Cell culture supernatant 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) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography DG + dUC + Filtration Protein markers EV: TSG101/ CD63/ CD81/ CD82/ Alix/ Rab5/ Caveolin1/ CD9 non-EV: Cell organelle protein Proteomics yes EV density (g/ml) 1.12-1.19 Show all info Study aim Biomarker Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium EV Depleted Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Pelleting: time(min) 120 Density gradient Only used for validation of main results 1 Density medium Sucrose Lowest density fraction 0.2 Highest density fraction 2 Orientation Top-down Speed (g) 120000 Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins Alix/ CD63/ CD81/ CD9/ TSG101/ CD82/ Rab5/ Caveolin1 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein ELISA Detected EV-associated proteins CD82/ Rab5/ Caveolin1 Characterization: Particle analysis NA NTA EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Close-up

	EV150010	1/1	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	DG dUC	Keerthikumar S	2015	56%
Study summary Full title Proteogenomic analysis reveals exosomes are more oncogenic than ectosomes. All authors Keerthikumar S, Gangoda L, Liem M, Fonseka P, Atukorala I, Ozcitti C, Mechler A, Adda CG, Ang CS, Mathivanan S Journal Oncotarget Abstract Extracellular vesicles (EVs) include the exosomes (30-100 nm) that are produced through the endocyti (show more...)Extracellular vesicles (EVs) include the exosomes (30-100 nm) that are produced through the endocytic pathway via the multivesicular bodies and the ectosomes (100-1000 nm) that are released through the budding of the plasma membrane. Despite the differences in the mode of biogenesis and size, reliable markers that can distinguish between exosomes and ectosomes are non-existent. Moreover, the precise functional differences between exosomes and ectosomes remains poorly characterised. Here, using label-free quantitative proteomics, we highlight proteins that could be exploited as markers to discriminate between exosomes and ectosomes. For the first time, a global proteogenomics analysis unveiled the secretion of mutant proteins that are implicated in cancer progression through tumor-derived EVs. Follow up integrated bioinformatics analysis highlighted the enrichment of oncogenic cargo in exosomes and ectosomes. Interestingly, exosomes induced significant cell proliferation and migration in recipient cells compared to ectosomes confirming the oncogenic nature of exosomes. These findings ascertain that cancer cells facilitate oncogenesis by the secretion of mutant and oncoproteins into the tumor microenvironment via exosomes and ectosomes. The integrative proteogenomics approach utilized in this study has the potential to identify disease biomarker candidates which can be later assayed in liquid biopsies obtained from cancer patients. (hide) EV-METRIC 56% (88th 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 Cell culture supernatant Sample origin DNF Focus vesicles exosomes / Ectosomes 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 DG + dUC Adj. k-factor 276.6 (pelleting) Protein markers EV: Alix/ CD81/ TSG101/ CD63 non-EV: MMP2/ Cell organelle protein Proteomics yes EV density (g/ml) 1.100 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 Below or equal to 800 g Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Pelleting: time(min) 1060 Pelleting: rotor type SW40 Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 276.6 Density gradient Density medium Iodixanol Lowest density fraction 5 Highest density fraction 40 Orientation Top-down Pelleting-wash: volume per pellet (mL) 1 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins Alix/ CD63/ CD81/ TSG101 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein/ MMP2 Characterization: Particle analysis NA EM EM-type transmission EM/ atomic force EM Image type Wide-field

	EV150021	1/1	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	DG dUC	Duchez AC	2015	56%
Study summary Full title Platelet microparticles are internalized in neutrophils via the concerted activity of 12-lipoxygenase and secreted phospholipase A2-IIA All authors Duchez AC, Boudreau LH, Bollinger J, Belleannée C, Cloutier N, Laffont B, Mendoza-Villarroel RE, Lévesque T, Rollet-Labelle E, Rousseau M, Allaeys I, Tremblay JJ, Poubelle PE, Lambeau G, Pouliot M, Provost P, Soulet D, Gelb MH, Boilard E Journal Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Abstract Platelets are anucleated blood elements highly potent at generating extracellular vesicles (EVs) cal (show more...)Platelets are anucleated blood elements highly potent at generating extracellular vesicles (EVs) called microparticles (MPs). Whereas EVs are accepted as an important means of intercellular communication, the mechanisms underlying platelet MP internalization in recipient cells are poorly understood. Our lipidomic analyses identified 12(S)-hydroxyeicosatetranoic acid [12(S)-HETE] as the predominant eicosanoid generated by MPs. Mechanistically, 12(S)-HETE is produced through the concerted activity of secreted phospholipase A2 IIA (sPLA2-IIA), present in inflammatory fluids, and platelet-type 12-lipoxygenase (12-LO), expressed by platelet MPs. Platelet MPs convey an elaborate set of transcription factors and nucleic acids, and contain mitochondria. We observed that MPs and their cargo are internalized by activated neutrophils in the endomembrane system via 12(S)-HETE. Platelet MPs are found inside neutrophils isolated from the joints of arthritic patients, and are found in neutrophils only in the presence of sPLA2-IIA and 12-LO in an in vivo model of autoimmune inflammatory arthritis. Using a combination of genetically modified mice, we show that the coordinated action of sPLA2-IIA and 12-LO promotes inflammatory arthritis. These findings identify 12(S)-HETE as a trigger of platelet MP internalization by neutrophils, a mechanism highly relevant to inflammatory processes. Because sPLA2-IIA is induced during inflammation, and 12-LO expression is restricted mainly to platelets, these observations demonstrate that platelet MPs promote their internalization in recipient cells through highly regulated mechanisms. (hide) EV-METRIC 56% (88th 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 Cell culture supernatant Sample origin DNF Focus vesicles 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 DG + dUC Protein markers EV: TSG101/ VDAC non-EV: Proteomics no EV density (g/ml) 1.1-1.14 Show all info Study aim Biogenesis/Sorting Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium serum free Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Pelleting: time(min) 90 Density gradient Only used for validation of main results 1 Density medium Iodixanol Lowest density fraction 5 Highest density fraction 40 Orientation Top-down Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins TSG101/ VDAC ELISA Detected EV-associated proteins VDAC Characterization: Particle analysis NA DLS

	EV150103	7/7	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	dUC	Dieudé M	2015	55%
Study summary Full title The 20S proteasome core, active within apoptotic exosome-like vesicles, induces autoantibody production and accelerates rejection. All authors Dieudé M, Bell C, Turgeon J, Beillevaire D, Pomerleau L, Yang B, Hamelin K, Qi S, Pallet N, Béland C, Dhahri W, Cailhier JF, Rousseau M, Duchez AC, Lévesque T, Lau A, Rondeau C, Gingras D, Muruve D, Rivard A, Cardinal H, Perreault C, Desjardins M, Boilard É, Thibault P, Hébert MJ Journal J Transl Med Abstract Autoantibodies to components of apoptotic cells, such as anti-perlecan antibodies, contribute to rej (show more...)Autoantibodies to components of apoptotic cells, such as anti-perlecan antibodies, contribute to rejection in organ transplant recipients. However, mechanisms of immunization to apoptotic components remain largely uncharacterized. We used large-scale proteomics, with validation by electron microscopy and biochemical methods, to compare the protein profiles of apoptotic bodies and apoptotic exosome-like vesicles, smaller extracellular vesicles released by endothelial cells downstream of caspase-3 activation. We identified apoptotic exosome-like vesicles as a central trigger for production of anti-perlecan antibodies and acceleration of rejection. Unlike apoptotic bodies, apoptotic exosome-like vesicles triggered the production of anti-perlecan antibodies in naïve mice and enhanced anti-perlecan antibody production and allograft inflammation in mice transplanted with an MHC (major histocompatibility complex)-incompatible aortic graft. The 20S proteasome core was active within apoptotic exosome-like vesicles and controlled their immunogenic activity. Finally, we showed that proteasome activity in circulating exosome-like vesicles increased after vascular injury in mice. These findings open new avenues for predicting and controlling maladaptive humoral responses to apoptotic cell components that enhance the risk of rejection after transplantation. (hide) EV-METRIC 55% (86th 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 Cell culture supernatant Sample origin Apoptosis Focus vesicles apoptotic exosome-like vesicle 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 dUC Adj. k-factor 127.9 (pelleting) Protein markers EV: LG3/ Fibronectin/ proteasome-alpha3/ Syntenin/ TCTP non-EV: Tubulin/ GM130 Proteomics yes Show all info Study aim Function, Biomarker, Identification of content (omics approaches) Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant Sample Condition Apoptosis EV-producing cells HUVEC EV-harvesting Medium Serum free medium Cell viability 75 Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 800 g and 10,000 g Equal to or above 150,000 g Between 50,000 g and 100,000 g Pelleting: time(min) 1080 Pelleting: rotor type SW 41 Ti Pelleting: speed (g) 200000 Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 127.9 Characterization: Protein analysis Protein Concentration Method microBCA Protein Concentration 300 Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins Syntenin, Fibronectin, TCTP, proteasome-alpha3, LG3 Not detected contaminants GM130, Tubulin Proteomics database Yes Characterization: Particle analysis NA Particle analysis: flow cytometry Flow cytometer type BDCantoII Special Order Research Product Hardware adjustment This high sensitivity Flow cytometer (hsFCM) is equipped with a small particle option. The forward scatter (FSC) on this dedicated equipment is coupled to a photomultiplier tube (PMT) with a 488 nm solid state;100mW output blue laser (rather than the conventional 20 mW);and includes a 633nmHeNe;20mW output red laser and a 405 nm solid state diode;50mW output violet laser. The hsFCM includes a FSC-PMT and a Fourier optical transformation unit;which reduces the background noise and increases the angle of diffusion;therby enhancing the detection of small-diameter particles. Calibration bead size 0.09,0.45,0.84,1,3.2 Report type Median Reported size (nm) 100-200 EV concentration Yes Particle yield 3.50E+07 particles/million cells EM EM-type Transmission-EM/ Immune-EM Proteïns LG3;proteasome-alpha3 Image type Close-up, Wide-field

	EV150007	1/10	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	dUC qEV	Lobb RJ	2015	50%
Study summary Full title Optimized exosome isolation protocol for cell culture supernatant and human plasma All authors Lobb RJ, Becker M, Wen SW, Wong CS, Wiegmans AP, Leimgruber A, Möller A Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract Extracellular vesicles represent a rich source of novel biomarkers in the diagnosis and prognosis of (show more...)Extracellular vesicles represent a rich source of novel biomarkers in the diagnosis and prognosis of disease. However, there is currently limited information elucidating the most efficient methods for obtaining high yields of pure exosomes, a subset of extracellular vesicles, from cell culture supernatant and complex biological fluids such as plasma. To this end, we comprehensively characterize a variety of exosome isolation protocols for their efficiency, yield and purity of isolated exosomes. Repeated ultracentrifugation steps can reduce the quality of exosome preparations leading to lower exosome yield. We show that concentration of cell culture conditioned media using ultrafiltration devices results in increased vesicle isolation when compared to traditional ultracentrifugation protocols. However, our data on using conditioned media isolated from the Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) SK-MES-1 cell line demonstrates that the choice of concentrating device can greatly impact the yield of isolated exosomes. We find that centrifuge-based concentrating methods are more appropriate than pressure-driven concentrating devices and allow the rapid isolation of exosomes from both NSCLC cell culture conditioned media and complex biological fluids. In fact to date, no protocol detailing exosome isolation utilizing current commercial methods from both cells and patient samples has been described. Utilizing tunable resistive pulse sensing and protein analysis, we provide a comparative analysis of 4 exosome isolation techniques, indicating their efficacy and preparation purity. Our results demonstrate that current precipitation protocols for the isolation of exosomes from cell culture conditioned media and plasma provide the least pure preparations of exosomes, whereas size exclusion isolation is comparable to density gradient purification of exosomes. We have identified current shortcomings in common extracellular vesicle isolation methods and provide a potential standardized method that is effective, reproducible and can be utilized for various starting materials. We believe this method will have extensive application in the growing field of extracellular vesicle research. (hide) EV-METRIC 50% (85th 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 Cell culture supernatant 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) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography dUC + qEV Protein markers EV: TSG101/ HSP70/ Flotilin1 non-EV: Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium serum free Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Commercial kit qEV Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins Flotilin1/ HSP70/ TSG101 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein Characterization: Particle analysis NA TRPS EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Wide-field

	EV150007	4/10	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	dUC Filtration	Lobb RJ	2015	50%
Study summary Full title Optimized exosome isolation protocol for cell culture supernatant and human plasma All authors Lobb RJ, Becker M, Wen SW, Wong CS, Wiegmans AP, Leimgruber A, Möller A Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract Extracellular vesicles represent a rich source of novel biomarkers in the diagnosis and prognosis of (show more...)Extracellular vesicles represent a rich source of novel biomarkers in the diagnosis and prognosis of disease. However, there is currently limited information elucidating the most efficient methods for obtaining high yields of pure exosomes, a subset of extracellular vesicles, from cell culture supernatant and complex biological fluids such as plasma. To this end, we comprehensively characterize a variety of exosome isolation protocols for their efficiency, yield and purity of isolated exosomes. Repeated ultracentrifugation steps can reduce the quality of exosome preparations leading to lower exosome yield. We show that concentration of cell culture conditioned media using ultrafiltration devices results in increased vesicle isolation when compared to traditional ultracentrifugation protocols. However, our data on using conditioned media isolated from the Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) SK-MES-1 cell line demonstrates that the choice of concentrating device can greatly impact the yield of isolated exosomes. We find that centrifuge-based concentrating methods are more appropriate than pressure-driven concentrating devices and allow the rapid isolation of exosomes from both NSCLC cell culture conditioned media and complex biological fluids. In fact to date, no protocol detailing exosome isolation utilizing current commercial methods from both cells and patient samples has been described. Utilizing tunable resistive pulse sensing and protein analysis, we provide a comparative analysis of 4 exosome isolation techniques, indicating their efficacy and preparation purity. Our results demonstrate that current precipitation protocols for the isolation of exosomes from cell culture conditioned media and plasma provide the least pure preparations of exosomes, whereas size exclusion isolation is comparable to density gradient purification of exosomes. We have identified current shortcomings in common extracellular vesicle isolation methods and provide a potential standardized method that is effective, reproducible and can be utilized for various starting materials. We believe this method will have extensive application in the growing field of extracellular vesicle research. (hide) EV-METRIC 50% (85th 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 Cell culture supernatant 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) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography dUC + Filtration Protein markers EV: TSG101/ HSP70/ Flotilin1/ CD63 non-EV: Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium serum free Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins CD63/ Flotilin1/ HSP70/ TSG101 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein Characterization: Particle analysis NA TRPS EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Wide-field

	EV150007	5/10	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	DG dUC Filtration	Lobb RJ	2015	50%
Study summary Full title Optimized exosome isolation protocol for cell culture supernatant and human plasma All authors Lobb RJ, Becker M, Wen SW, Wong CS, Wiegmans AP, Leimgruber A, Möller A Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract Extracellular vesicles represent a rich source of novel biomarkers in the diagnosis and prognosis of (show more...)Extracellular vesicles represent a rich source of novel biomarkers in the diagnosis and prognosis of disease. However, there is currently limited information elucidating the most efficient methods for obtaining high yields of pure exosomes, a subset of extracellular vesicles, from cell culture supernatant and complex biological fluids such as plasma. To this end, we comprehensively characterize a variety of exosome isolation protocols for their efficiency, yield and purity of isolated exosomes. Repeated ultracentrifugation steps can reduce the quality of exosome preparations leading to lower exosome yield. We show that concentration of cell culture conditioned media using ultrafiltration devices results in increased vesicle isolation when compared to traditional ultracentrifugation protocols. However, our data on using conditioned media isolated from the Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) SK-MES-1 cell line demonstrates that the choice of concentrating device can greatly impact the yield of isolated exosomes. We find that centrifuge-based concentrating methods are more appropriate than pressure-driven concentrating devices and allow the rapid isolation of exosomes from both NSCLC cell culture conditioned media and complex biological fluids. In fact to date, no protocol detailing exosome isolation utilizing current commercial methods from both cells and patient samples has been described. Utilizing tunable resistive pulse sensing and protein analysis, we provide a comparative analysis of 4 exosome isolation techniques, indicating their efficacy and preparation purity. Our results demonstrate that current precipitation protocols for the isolation of exosomes from cell culture conditioned media and plasma provide the least pure preparations of exosomes, whereas size exclusion isolation is comparable to density gradient purification of exosomes. We have identified current shortcomings in common extracellular vesicle isolation methods and provide a potential standardized method that is effective, reproducible and can be utilized for various starting materials. We believe this method will have extensive application in the growing field of extracellular vesicle research. (hide) EV-METRIC 50% (85th 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 Cell culture supernatant 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) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography DG + dUC + Filtration Protein markers EV: TSG101/ HSP70/ Flotilin1 non-EV: Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium serum free Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Density gradient Density medium Iodixanol Lowest density fraction 5 Highest density fraction 40 Orientation Top-down Rotor type 50.2Ti Speed (g) 100000 Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins Flotilin1/ HSP70/ TSG101 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein Characterization: Particle analysis NA TRPS

	EV150007	7/10	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	dUC Exo-spin Filtration	Lobb RJ	2015	50%
Study summary Full title Optimized exosome isolation protocol for cell culture supernatant and human plasma All authors Lobb RJ, Becker M, Wen SW, Wong CS, Wiegmans AP, Leimgruber A, Möller A Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract Extracellular vesicles represent a rich source of novel biomarkers in the diagnosis and prognosis of (show more...)Extracellular vesicles represent a rich source of novel biomarkers in the diagnosis and prognosis of disease. However, there is currently limited information elucidating the most efficient methods for obtaining high yields of pure exosomes, a subset of extracellular vesicles, from cell culture supernatant and complex biological fluids such as plasma. To this end, we comprehensively characterize a variety of exosome isolation protocols for their efficiency, yield and purity of isolated exosomes. Repeated ultracentrifugation steps can reduce the quality of exosome preparations leading to lower exosome yield. We show that concentration of cell culture conditioned media using ultrafiltration devices results in increased vesicle isolation when compared to traditional ultracentrifugation protocols. However, our data on using conditioned media isolated from the Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) SK-MES-1 cell line demonstrates that the choice of concentrating device can greatly impact the yield of isolated exosomes. We find that centrifuge-based concentrating methods are more appropriate than pressure-driven concentrating devices and allow the rapid isolation of exosomes from both NSCLC cell culture conditioned media and complex biological fluids. In fact to date, no protocol detailing exosome isolation utilizing current commercial methods from both cells and patient samples has been described. Utilizing tunable resistive pulse sensing and protein analysis, we provide a comparative analysis of 4 exosome isolation techniques, indicating their efficacy and preparation purity. Our results demonstrate that current precipitation protocols for the isolation of exosomes from cell culture conditioned media and plasma provide the least pure preparations of exosomes, whereas size exclusion isolation is comparable to density gradient purification of exosomes. We have identified current shortcomings in common extracellular vesicle isolation methods and provide a potential standardized method that is effective, reproducible and can be utilized for various starting materials. We believe this method will have extensive application in the growing field of extracellular vesicle research. (hide) EV-METRIC 50% (85th 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 Cell culture supernatant 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) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography dUC + Exo-spin + Filtration Protein markers EV: TSG101/ HSP70/ Flotilin1 non-EV: Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium serum free Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Commercial kit Exo-spin Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins Flotilin1/ HSP70/ TSG101 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein Characterization: Particle analysis NA TRPS EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Close-up

	EV150007	8/10	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	dUC ExoQuick Filtration	Lobb RJ	2015	50%
Study summary Full title Optimized exosome isolation protocol for cell culture supernatant and human plasma All authors Lobb RJ, Becker M, Wen SW, Wong CS, Wiegmans AP, Leimgruber A, Möller A Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract Extracellular vesicles represent a rich source of novel biomarkers in the diagnosis and prognosis of (show more...)Extracellular vesicles represent a rich source of novel biomarkers in the diagnosis and prognosis of disease. However, there is currently limited information elucidating the most efficient methods for obtaining high yields of pure exosomes, a subset of extracellular vesicles, from cell culture supernatant and complex biological fluids such as plasma. To this end, we comprehensively characterize a variety of exosome isolation protocols for their efficiency, yield and purity of isolated exosomes. Repeated ultracentrifugation steps can reduce the quality of exosome preparations leading to lower exosome yield. We show that concentration of cell culture conditioned media using ultrafiltration devices results in increased vesicle isolation when compared to traditional ultracentrifugation protocols. However, our data on using conditioned media isolated from the Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) SK-MES-1 cell line demonstrates that the choice of concentrating device can greatly impact the yield of isolated exosomes. We find that centrifuge-based concentrating methods are more appropriate than pressure-driven concentrating devices and allow the rapid isolation of exosomes from both NSCLC cell culture conditioned media and complex biological fluids. In fact to date, no protocol detailing exosome isolation utilizing current commercial methods from both cells and patient samples has been described. Utilizing tunable resistive pulse sensing and protein analysis, we provide a comparative analysis of 4 exosome isolation techniques, indicating their efficacy and preparation purity. Our results demonstrate that current precipitation protocols for the isolation of exosomes from cell culture conditioned media and plasma provide the least pure preparations of exosomes, whereas size exclusion isolation is comparable to density gradient purification of exosomes. We have identified current shortcomings in common extracellular vesicle isolation methods and provide a potential standardized method that is effective, reproducible and can be utilized for various starting materials. We believe this method will have extensive application in the growing field of extracellular vesicle research. (hide) EV-METRIC 50% (85th 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 Cell culture supernatant 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) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography dUC + ExoQuick + Filtration Protein markers EV: TSG101/ HSP70/ Flotilin1 non-EV: Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium serum free Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Commercial kit ExoQuick Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins Flotilin1/ HSP70/ TSG101 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein Characterization: Particle analysis NA TRPS EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Close-up

	EV150108	3/4	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	dUC	Tosar JP	2015	44%
Study summary Full title Assessment of small RNA sorting into different extracellular fractions revealed by high-throughput sequencing of breast cell lines. All authors Tosar JP, Gámbaro F, Sanguinetti J, Bonilla B, Witwer KW, Cayota A. Journal Nucleic Acids Res Abstract Intercellular communication can be mediated by extracellular small regulatory RNAs (sRNAs). Circulat (show more...)Intercellular communication can be mediated by extracellular small regulatory RNAs (sRNAs). Circulating sRNAs are being intensively studied for their promising use as minimally invasive disease biomarkers. To date, most attention is centered on exosomes and microRNAs as the vectors and the secreted species, respectively. However, this field would benefit from an increased understanding of the plethora of sRNAs secreted by different cell types in different extracellular fractions. It is still not clear if specific sRNAs are selected for secretion, or if sRNA secretion is mostly passive. We sequenced the intracellular sRNA content (19-60 nt) of breast epithelial cell lines (MCF-7 and MCF-10A) and compared it with extracellular fractions enriched in microvesicles, exosomes and ribonucleoprotein complexes. Our results are consistent with a non-selective secretion model for most microRNAs, although a few showed secretion patterns consistent with preferential secretion. On the contrary, 5' tRNA halves and 5' RNA Y4-derived fragments of 31-33 were greatly and significantly enriched in the extracellular space (even in non-mammary cell lines), where tRNA halves were detected as part of ∼45 kDa ribonucleoprotein complexes. Overall, we show that different sRNA families have characteristic secretion patterns and open the question of the role of these sRNAs in the extracellular space. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (79th 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 Cell culture supernatant Sample origin Control condition Focus vesicles extracellular vesicle 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 dUC Protein markers EV: TSG101/ CD63/ CD9 non-EV: Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Biogenesis/cargo sorting/Identification of content (omics approaches) Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant Sample Condition Control condition EV-producing cells MCF-7 EV-harvesting Medium Serum free medium Cell viability Yes Cell viability (%) Yes 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 Pelleting: time(min) 30 Pelleting: rotor type Not specified Pelleting: speed (g) 16000 Wash: time (min) 30 Wash: Rotor Type Not specified Wash: speed (g) 16000 Characterization: Protein analysis Protein Concentration Method BCA Western Blot Not detected EV-associated proteins CD9/ CD63/ TSG101 Characterization: Particle analysis NA DLS Report type Not Reported NTA Report type Not Reported EM EM-type Transmission-EM Image type Wide-field

	EV160016	1/3	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	"(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation Ultrafiltration Filtration"	Cha DJ	2015	44%
Study summary Full title KRAS-dependent sorting of miRNA to exosomes All authors Cha DJ, Franklin JL, Dou Y, Liu Q, Higginbotham JN, Demory Beckler M, Weaver AM, Vickers K, Prasad N, Levy S, Zhang B, Coffey RJ, Patton JG. Journal Elife Abstract Mutant KRAS colorectal cancer (CRC) cells release protein-laden exosomes that can alter the tumor mi (show more...)Mutant KRAS colorectal cancer (CRC) cells release protein-laden exosomes that can alter the tumor microenvironment. To test whether exosomal RNAs also contribute to changes in gene expression in recipient cells, and whether mutant KRAS might regulate the... (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (79th 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 Cell culture supernatant Sample origin Control condition Focus vesicles exosome 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 "(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation + Ultrafiltration + Filtration" Protein markers EV: "Flotillin1/ TSG101/ HSP70/ KRAS/ EGFR/ RAP1/ SRC/ LYN/ ITGB1/ ITGA2/ ITGAV/ ITGA6/ ITGB4/ EPHA2/ EPS8/ CTTN" non-EV: VDAC Proteomics yes Show all info Study aim Identification of content (omics approaches) Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant Sample Condition Control condition EV-producing cells DKO-1 EV-harvesting Medium Serum free medium Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Equal to or above 150,000 g Pelleting: time(min) 120 Pelleting: rotor type Not specified Pelleting: speed (g) 150000 Wash: time (min) 180 Wash: Rotor Type Not specified Wash: speed (g) 150000 Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Ultra filtration Cut-off size (kDa) 100 Membrane type Not specified Characterization: Protein analysis Protein Concentration Method microBCA Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins "Flotillin1/ TSG101/ HSP70/ KRAS/ EGFR/ RAP1/ SRC/ LYN/ ITGB1/ ITGA2/ ITGAV/ ITGA6/ ITGB4/ EPHA2/ EPS8/ CTTN" Not detected contaminants VDAC Proteomics database No Characterization: Particle analysis NA NTA Report type Not Reported EV concentration Yes EM EM-type Transmission-EM Image type Wide-field Report size (nm) 56.3

	EV160016	3/3	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	"(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation Ultrafiltration Filtration"	Cha DJ	2015	44%
Study summary Full title KRAS-dependent sorting of miRNA to exosomes All authors Cha DJ, Franklin JL, Dou Y, Liu Q, Higginbotham JN, Demory Beckler M, Weaver AM, Vickers K, Prasad N, Levy S, Zhang B, Coffey RJ, Patton JG. Journal Elife Abstract Mutant KRAS colorectal cancer (CRC) cells release protein-laden exosomes that can alter the tumor mi (show more...)Mutant KRAS colorectal cancer (CRC) cells release protein-laden exosomes that can alter the tumor microenvironment. To test whether exosomal RNAs also contribute to changes in gene expression in recipient cells, and whether mutant KRAS might regulate the... (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (79th 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 Cell culture supernatant Sample origin Control condition Focus vesicles exosome 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 "(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation + Ultrafiltration + Filtration" Protein markers EV: "Flotillin1/ TSG101/ HSP70/ EGFR/ RAP1/ SRC/ ITGB1/ ITGA2/ ITGAV/ CTNNA" non-EV: VDAC Proteomics yes Show all info Study aim Identification of content (omics approaches) Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant Sample Condition Control condition EV-producing cells DKs-8 EV-harvesting Medium Serum free medium Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Equal to or above 150,000 g Pelleting: time(min) 120 Pelleting: rotor type Not specified Pelleting: speed (g) 150000 Wash: time (min) 180 Wash: Rotor Type Not specified Wash: speed (g) 150000 Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Ultra filtration Cut-off size (kDa) 100 Membrane type Not specified Characterization: Protein analysis Protein Concentration Method microBCA Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins "Flotillin1/ TSG101/ HSP70/ EGFR/ RAP1/ SRC/ ITGB1/ ITGA2/ ITGAV/ CTNNA" Not detected contaminants VDAC Proteomics database No Characterization: Particle analysis NA NTA Report type Not Reported EV concentration Yes EM EM-type Transmission-EM Image type Wide-field Report size (nm) 59.2

	EV150104	1/4	Homo sapiens	Urine	DC dUC	Pocsfalvi G	2015	44%
Study summary Full title Urinary extracellular vesicles as reservoirs of altered proteins during the pathogenesis of polycystic kidney disease. All authors Pocsfalvi G, Raj DA, Fiume I, Vilasi A, Trepiccione F, Capasso G. Journal Proteomics Clin Appl Abstract PURPOSE: Recent findings indicate that urinary extracellular vesicles (EVs) might reflect the pathop (show more...)PURPOSE: Recent findings indicate that urinary extracellular vesicles (EVs) might reflect the pathophysiological state of urinary system; and that EVs-induced ciliary signaling is a possible mechanism of intercellular communication within the tract. Here, we aimed to analyze the protein expression of urinary EVs during autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: EVs were isolated from pooled urine samples of healthy control and ADPKD patients at two different stages of the disease and under tolvaptan treatment using the double-cushion ultracentrifugation method. Proteins were identified and quantified by iTRAQ and multidimensional protein identification technology (MudPIT)-based quantitative proteomics. RESULTS: Quantitative analyses identified 83 differentially expressed EV proteins. Many of these have apical membrane origin and are involved in signal transduction pathways of primary cilia, Ca(2+) -activated signaling, cell-cycle regulation, and cell differentiation. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The reduced AQP-2 and the increased APO-A1 levels observed in all ADPKD-affected groups may reflects the impaired renal concentrating capability of these patients and correlated with estimated glomerular filtration rate decline. The levels of some upregulated proteins involved in Ca(2+) -activated signaling declined upon tolvaptan treatment. The results obtained suggest that the quantitative proteomics of urinary EVs might be useful to monitor proteins difficult to access noninvasively, and thus advance our understanding of urinary tract physiology and pathology. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (80th 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 Urine Sample origin Control condition Focus vesicles extracellular vesicle 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 DC + dUC Protein markers EV: TSG101/ Alix/ AQP2/ PKD22/ NHE3/ CD9/ PKD11 non-EV: / Uromodulin/ Albumin Proteomics yes Show all info Study aim Biomarker Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Urine Sample Condition Control condition 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 Equal to or above 150,000 g Pelleting: time(min) 60 Pelleting: rotor type Not specified Pelleting: speed (g) 200000 Density cushion Density medium Sucrose Characterization: Protein analysis Protein Concentration Method microBCA Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins CD9/ NHE3/ AQP2/ PKD11/ PKD22/ TSG101/ Alix Detected contaminants Not detected contaminants Albumin/ Uromodulin Proteomics database No Characterization: Particle analysis NA NTA Report type Modus Reported size (nm) 95 EM EM-type Transmission-EM Image type Wide-field

	EV150103	5/7	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	dUC	Dieudé M	2015	44%
Study summary Full title The 20S proteasome core, active within apoptotic exosome-like vesicles, induces autoantibody production and accelerates rejection. All authors Dieudé M, Bell C, Turgeon J, Beillevaire D, Pomerleau L, Yang B, Hamelin K, Qi S, Pallet N, Béland C, Dhahri W, Cailhier JF, Rousseau M, Duchez AC, Lévesque T, Lau A, Rondeau C, Gingras D, Muruve D, Rivard A, Cardinal H, Perreault C, Desjardins M, Boilard É, Thibault P, Hébert MJ Journal J Transl Med Abstract Autoantibodies to components of apoptotic cells, such as anti-perlecan antibodies, contribute to rej (show more...)Autoantibodies to components of apoptotic cells, such as anti-perlecan antibodies, contribute to rejection in organ transplant recipients. However, mechanisms of immunization to apoptotic components remain largely uncharacterized. We used large-scale proteomics, with validation by electron microscopy and biochemical methods, to compare the protein profiles of apoptotic bodies and apoptotic exosome-like vesicles, smaller extracellular vesicles released by endothelial cells downstream of caspase-3 activation. We identified apoptotic exosome-like vesicles as a central trigger for production of anti-perlecan antibodies and acceleration of rejection. Unlike apoptotic bodies, apoptotic exosome-like vesicles triggered the production of anti-perlecan antibodies in naïve mice and enhanced anti-perlecan antibody production and allograft inflammation in mice transplanted with an MHC (major histocompatibility complex)-incompatible aortic graft. The 20S proteasome core was active within apoptotic exosome-like vesicles and controlled their immunogenic activity. Finally, we showed that proteasome activity in circulating exosome-like vesicles increased after vascular injury in mice. These findings open new avenues for predicting and controlling maladaptive humoral responses to apoptotic cell components that enhance the risk of rejection after transplantation. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (79th 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 Cell culture supernatant Sample origin Apoptosis Focus vesicles apoptotic body 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 dUC Adj. k-factor 127.9 (pelleting) Protein markers EV: Tubulin/ TCTP/ Fibronectin/ Syntenin/ LG3/ GM130 non-EV: None Proteomics yes Show all info Study aim Function, Biomarker, Identification of content (omics approaches) Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant Sample Condition Apoptosis EV-producing cells HUVEC EV-harvesting Medium Serum free medium Cell viability 75 Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 50,000 g and 100,000 g Pelleting: time(min) 1080 Pelleting: rotor type SW 41 Ti Pelleting: speed (g) 200000 Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 127.9 Characterization: Protein analysis Protein Concentration Method microBCA Protein Concentration 2000 Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins Syntenin, Fibronectin, TCTP, GM130, Tubulin, LG3 Proteomics database Yes Characterization: Particle analysis NA Particle analysis: flow cytometry Flow cytometer type BDCantoII Special Order Research Product Hardware adjustment This high sensitivity Flow cytometer (hsFCM) is equipped with a small particle option. The forward scatter (FSC) on this dedicated equipment is coupled to a photomultiplier tube (PMT) with a 488 nm solid state;100mW output blue laser (rather than the conventional 20 mW);and includes a 633nmHeNe;20mW output red laser and a 405 nm solid state diode;50mW output violet laser. The hsFCM includes a FSC-PMT and a Fourier optical transformation unit;which reduces the background noise and increases the angle of diffusion;therby enhancing the detection of small-diameter particles. Calibration bead size 0.09,0.45,0.84,1,3.2 Report type Median Reported size (nm) 100-200 EV concentration Yes Particle yield 3.50E+07 particles/million cells EM EM-type Transmission-EM Image type Close-up, Wide-field

	EV150031	1/1	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	DG dUC	van Niel G	2015	44%
Study summary Full title Apolipoprotein E Regulates Amyloid Formation within Endosomes of Pigment Cells All authors van Niel G, Bergam P, Di Cicco A, Hurbain I, Lo Cicero A, Dingli F, Palmulli R, Fort C, Potier MC, Schurgers LJ, Loew D, Levy D, Raposo G Journal Cell Rep Abstract Accumulation of toxic amyloid oligomers is a key feature in the pathogenesis of amyloid-related dise (show more...)Accumulation of toxic amyloid oligomers is a key feature in the pathogenesis of amyloid-related diseases. Formation of mature amyloid fibrils is one defense mechanism to neutralize toxic prefibrillar oligomers. This mechanism is notably influenced by apolipoprotein E variants. Cells that produce mature amyloid fibrils to serve physiological functions must exploit specific mechanisms to avoid potential accumulation of toxic species. Pigment cells have tuned their endosomes to maximize the formation of functional amyloid from the protein PMEL. Here, we show that ApoE is associated with intraluminal vesicles (ILV) within endosomes and remain associated with ILVs when they are secreted as exosomes. ApoE functions in the ESCRT-independent sorting mechanism of PMEL onto ILVs and regulates the endosomal formation of PMEL amyloid fibrils in vitro and in vivo. This process secures the physiological formation of amyloid fibrils by exploiting ILVs as amyloid nucleating platforms. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (79th 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 Cell culture supernatant Sample origin DNF Focus vesicles Endosomes 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 DG + dUC Protein markers EV: TSG101/ ApoE/ CD63 non-EV: Proteomics yes EV density (g/ml) 1.06-1.15 Show all info Study aim Biogenesis/Sorting Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Pelleting: time(min) 60 Density gradient Only used for validation of main results 1 Density medium Iodixanol Lowest density fraction 10 Highest density fraction 40 Orientation Top-down Speed (g) 100000 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins CD63/ TSG101/ ApoE ELISA Detected EV-associated proteins ApoE Characterization: Particle analysis NA EM EM-type immune EM/ cryo EM Proteïns CD63;ApoE Image type Close-up, Wide-field

	EV150051	1/3	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	dUC	Hoshino A	2015	44%
Study summary Full title Tumour exosome integrins determine organotropic metastasis All authors Hoshino A, Costa-Silva B, Shen TL, Rodrigues G, Hashimoto A, Tesic Mark M, Molina H, Kohsaka S, Di Giannatale A, Ceder S, Singh S, Williams C, Soplop N, Uryu K, Pharmer L, King T, Bojmar L, Davies AE, Ararso Y, Zhang T, Zhang H, Hernandez J, Weiss JM, Dumont-Cole VD, Kramer K, Wexler LH, Narendran A, Schwartz GK, Healey JH, Sandstrom P, Jørgen Labori K, Kure EH, Grandgenett PM, Hollingsworth MA, de Sousa M, Kaur S, Jain M, Mallya K, Batra SK, Jarnagin WR, Brady MS, Fodstad O, Muller V, Pantel K, Minn AJ, Bissell MJ, Garcia BA, Kang Y, Rajasekhar VK, Ghajar CM, Matei I, Peinado H, Bromberg J, Lyden D Journal Nature Abstract Ever since Stephen Paget's 1889 hypothesis, metastatic organotropism has remained one of cancer's gr (show more...)Ever since Stephen Paget's 1889 hypothesis, metastatic organotropism has remained one of cancer's greatest mysteries. Here we demonstrate that exosomes from mouse and human lung-, liver- and brain-tropic tumour cells fuse preferentially with resident cells at their predicted destination, namely lung fibroblasts and epithelial cells, liver Kupffer cells and brain endothelial cells. We show that tumour-derived exosomes uptaken by organ-specific cells prepare the pre-metastatic niche. Treatment with exosomes from lung-tropic models redirected the metastasis of bone-tropic tumour cells. Exosome proteomics revealed distinct integrin expression patterns, in which the exosomal integrins ?6?4 and ?6?1 were associated with lung metastasis, while exosomal integrin ?v?5 was linked to liver metastasis. Targeting the integrins ?6?4 and ?v?5 decreased exosome uptake, as well as lung and liver metastasis, respectively. We demonstrate that exosome integrin uptake by resident cells activates Src phosphorylation and pro-inflammatory S100 gene expression. Finally, our clinical data indicate that exosomal integrins could be used to predict organ-specific metastasis. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (79th 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 Cell culture supernatant 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) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography dUC Adj. k-factor 156.9 (pelleting) / 156.9 (washing) Protein markers EV: GAPDH non-EV: Proteomics yes Show all info Study aim Function 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 10,000 g and 50,000 g Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Pelleting: time(min) 70 Pelleting: rotor type 70Ti Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 156.9 Wash: volume per pellet (ml) 20 Wash: Rotor Type 70Ti Wash: adjusted k-factor 156.9 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins GAPDH ELISA Detected EV-associated proteins GAPDH Characterization: Particle analysis NA NTA EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Wide-field

	EV150012	1/2	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	dUC	Santi A	2015	44%
Study summary Full title Cancer associated fibroblasts transfer lipids and proteins to cancer cells through cargo vesicles supporting tumor growth All authors Santi A, Caselli A, Ranaldi F, Paoli P, Mugnaioni C, Michelucci E, Cirri P Journal Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Cell Res Abstract Fibroblasts are the most abundant cells in connective tissue and, with fibrillar extracellular matri (show more...)Fibroblasts are the most abundant cells in connective tissue and, with fibrillar extracellular matrix, form the structural scaffolding of organs. In solid tumors, interaction with cancer cells induces fibroblasts transdifferentiation into an activated form, which become a fundamental part of the tumor stroma. Within tumor microenvironment stromal and cancer cells engage a crosstalk that is mediated by soluble factors, cellcell contacts and extracellular vesicles trafficlking. Here we report that fibroblasts have the ability to transfer a remarkable amount of proteins and lipids to neighboring cells, in an ectosome-dependent fashion, identifying a novel and native property of these cells. Cancer-associated fibroblasts show an enhanced production and delivering of ectc:Jsomes to cancer cells compared to normal fibroblasts. As a consequence of this phenomenon, tumor cells increase their proliferation rate, indicating that ectosome-mediated trafficking could be a relevant mechanism mediating the trophic function of activated connective tissue on tumor cells. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (79th 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 Cell culture supernatant Sample origin DNF 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 dUC Protein markers EV: Tubulin/ CD81/ GAPDH non-EV: Alpha-enolase/ Vimentin/ Cell organelle protein 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 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Pelleting: time(min) 90 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins CD81/ Tubulin/ GAPDH Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein/ Alpha-enolase/ Vimentin ELISA Detected EV-associated proteins Tubulin/ GAPDH Characterization: Particle analysis NA DLS EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Wide-field

	EV150012	2/2	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	dUC	Santi A	2015	44%
Study summary Full title Cancer associated fibroblasts transfer lipids and proteins to cancer cells through cargo vesicles supporting tumor growth All authors Santi A, Caselli A, Ranaldi F, Paoli P, Mugnaioni C, Michelucci E, Cirri P Journal Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Cell Res Abstract Fibroblasts are the most abundant cells in connective tissue and, with fibrillar extracellular matri (show more...)Fibroblasts are the most abundant cells in connective tissue and, with fibrillar extracellular matrix, form the structural scaffolding of organs. In solid tumors, interaction with cancer cells induces fibroblasts transdifferentiation into an activated form, which become a fundamental part of the tumor stroma. Within tumor microenvironment stromal and cancer cells engage a crosstalk that is mediated by soluble factors, cellcell contacts and extracellular vesicles trafficlking. Here we report that fibroblasts have the ability to transfer a remarkable amount of proteins and lipids to neighboring cells, in an ectosome-dependent fashion, identifying a novel and native property of these cells. Cancer-associated fibroblasts show an enhanced production and delivering of ectc:Jsomes to cancer cells compared to normal fibroblasts. As a consequence of this phenomenon, tumor cells increase their proliferation rate, indicating that ectosome-mediated trafficking could be a relevant mechanism mediating the trophic function of activated connective tissue on tumor cells. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (79th 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 Cell culture supernatant Sample origin DNF 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 dUC Protein markers EV: Alpha-enolase/ Tubulin/ GAPDH/ Vimentin/ Integrin-beta1/ MMP2 non-EV: CD81/ Cell organelle protein 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 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Pelleting: time(min) 40 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins Integrin-beta1/ MMP2/ Tubulin/ GAPDH/ Vimentin/ Alpha-enolase Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein/ CD81 ELISA Detected EV-associated proteins Integrin-beta1/ MMP2/ Tubulin/ GAPDH/ Vimentin/ Alpha-enolase Characterization: Particle analysis NA DLS EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Close-up

	EV150003	2/2	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	dUC	Saari H	2015	44%
Study summary Full title Microvesicle- and exosome-mediated drug delivery enhances the cytotoxicity of Paclitaxel in autologous prostate cancer cells All authors Saari H, Lázaro-Ibáñez E, Viitala T, Vuorimaa-Laukkanen E, Siljander P, Yliperttula M Journal J Control Release Abstract BACKGROUND: Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are naturally occurring membrane particles that mediate int (show more...)BACKGROUND: Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are naturally occurring membrane particles that mediate intercellular communication by delivering molecular information between cells. In this study, we investigated the effectiveness of two different populations of EVs (microvesicle- and exosome-enriched) as carriers of Paclitaxel to autologous prostate cancer cells. METHODS: EVs were isolated from LNCaP- and PC-3 prostate cancer cell cultures using differential centrifugation and characterized by electron microscopy, nanoparticle tracking analysis, and Western blot. The uptake of microvesicles and exosomes by the autologous prostate cancer cells was assessed by flow cytometry and confocal microscopy. The EVs were loaded with Paclitaxel and the effectiveness of EV-mediated drug delivery was assessed with viability assays. The distribution of EVs and EV-delivered Paclitaxel in cells was inspected by confocal microscopy. RESULTS: Our main finding was that the loading of Paclitaxel to autologous prostate cancer cell-derived EVs increased its cytotoxic effect. This capacity was independent of the EV population and the cell line tested. Although the EVs without the drug increased cancer cell viability, the net effect of enhanced cytotoxicity remained. Both EV populations delivered Paclitaxel to the recipient cells through endocytosis, leading to the release of the drug from within the cells. The removal of EV surface proteins did not affect exosomes, while the drug delivery mediated by microvesicles was partially inhibited. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer cell-derived EVs can be used as effective carriers of Paclitaxel to their parental cells, bringing the drug into the cells through an endocytic pathway and increasing its cytotoxicity. However, due to the increased cell viability, the use of cancer cell-derived EVs must be further investigated before any clinical applications can be designed. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (79th 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 Cell culture supernatant Sample origin DNF Focus vesicles exosomes / 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 dUC Adj. k-factor 52.47 (washing) Protein markers EV: TSG101/ CD63/ CD81/ GAPDH/ Alpha-tubulin/ CD9 non-EV: Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Function Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium EV Depleted Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Pelleting: time(min) 60 Wash: volume per pellet (ml) 1 Wash: Rotor Type TLA55 Wash: adjusted k-factor 52.47 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins CD63/ CD81/ CD9/ TSG101/ Alpha-tubulin/ GAPDH ELISA Detected EV-associated proteins Alpha-tubulin/ GAPDH Characterization: Particle analysis NA NTA EM EM-type transmission EM/ cryo EM Image type Close-up

	EV150015	2/2	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	DG dUC Filtration	Paggetti J	2015	44%
Study summary Full title Exosomes released by chronic lymphocytic leukemia cells induce the transition of stromal cells into cancer-associated fibroblasts All authors Paggetti J, Haderk F, Seiffert M, Janji B, Distler U, Ammerlaan W, Kim YJ, Adam J, Lichter P, Solary E, Berchem G, Moussay E Journal Blood Abstract Exosomes derived from solid tumor cells are involved in immune suppression, angiogenesis, and metast (show more...)Exosomes derived from solid tumor cells are involved in immune suppression, angiogenesis, and metastasis, but the role of leukemia-derived exosomes has been less investigated. The pathogenesis of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is stringently associated with a tumor-supportive microenvironment and a dysfunctional immune system. Here, we explore the role of CLL-derived exosomes in the cellular and molecular mechanisms by which malignant cells create this favorable surrounding. We show that CLL-derived exosomes are actively incorporated by endothelial and mesenchymal stem cells ex vivo and in vivo and that the transfer of exosomal protein and microRNA induces an inflammatory phenotype in the target cells, which resembles the phenotype of cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs). As a result, stromal cells show enhanced proliferation, migration, and secretion of inflammatory cytokines, contributing to a tumor-supportive microenvironment. Exosome uptake by endothelial cells increased angiogenesis ex vivo and in vivo, and coinjection of CLL-derived exosomes and CLL cells promoted tumor growth in immunodeficient mice. Finally, we detected ?-smooth actin-positive stromal cells in lymph nodes of CLL patients. These findings demonstrate that CLL-derived exosomes actively promote disease progression by modulating several functions of surrounding stromal cells that acquire features of cancer-associated fibroblasts. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (79th 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 Cell culture supernatant 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) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography DG + dUC + Filtration Protein markers EV: TSG101/ Rab5a/ CD63/ HSP90/ Alix/ AChE/ HSP72/ MHC2/ Ago2 non-EV: Proteomics yes EV density (g/ml) 1.15-1.17 Show all info Study aim Function 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 100,000 g and 150,000 g Pelleting: time(min) 70 Density gradient Only used for validation of main results 1 Density medium Sucrose Lowest density fraction 0.2 Highest density fraction 2.5 Orientation Top-down Speed (g) 110000 Filtration steps 0.45µm > x > 0.22µm, Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins Alix/ CD63/ HSP90/ TSG101/ MHC2/ Rab5a/ HSP72/ Ago2/ AChE ELISA Detected EV-associated proteins MHC2/ Rab5a/ HSP72/ Ago2/ AChE Characterization: Particle analysis NA Particle analysis: flow cytometry EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Close-up

	EV150006	1/2	Homo sapiens Mus musculus	Cell culture supernatant	DG dUC Filtration	Melo SA	2015	44%
Study summary Full title Glypican-1 identifies cancer exosomes and detects early pancreatic cancer All authors Melo SA, Luecke LB, Kahlert C, Fernandez AF, Gammon ST, Kaye J, LeBleu VS, Mittendorf EA, Weitz J, Rahbari N, Reissfelder C, Pilarsky C, Fraga MF, Piwnica-Worms D, Kalluri R Journal Nature Abstract Exosomes are lipid-bilayer-enclosed extracellular vesicles that contain proteins and nucleic acids. (show more...)Exosomes are lipid-bilayer-enclosed extracellular vesicles that contain proteins and nucleic acids. They are secreted by all cells and circulate in the blood. Specific detection and isolation of cancer-cell-derived exosomes in the circulation is currently lacking. Using mass spectrometry analyses, we identify a cell surface proteoglycan, glypican-1 (GPC1), specifically enriched on cancer-cell-derived exosomes. GPC1(+) circulating exosomes (crExos) were monitored and isolated using flow cytometry from the serum of patients and mice with cancer. GPC1(+) crExos were detected in the serum of patients with pancreatic cancer with absolute specificity and sensitivity, distinguishing healthy subjects and patients with a benign pancreatic disease from patients with early- and late-stage pancreatic cancer. Levels of GPC1(+) crExos correlate with tumour burden and the survival of pre- and post-surgical patients. GPC1(+) crExos from patients and from mice with spontaneous pancreatic tumours carry specific KRAS mutations, and reliably detect pancreatic intraepithelial lesions in mice despite negative signals by magnetic resonance imaging. GPC1(+) crExos may serve as a potential non-invasive diagnostic and screening tool to detect early stages of pancreatic cancer to facilitate possible curative surgical therapy. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (79th 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 Cell culture supernatant 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) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography DG + dUC + Filtration Protein markers EV: CD81/ Flotilin1 non-EV: Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Biomarker Sample Species Homo sapiens / Mus musculus Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium EV Depleted Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Pelleting: time(min) 120 Wash: volume per pellet (ml) 35 Density gradient Only used for validation of main results 1 Density medium Sucrose Lowest density fraction 0.25 Highest density fraction 2 Orientation Bottom-up Speed (g) 150000 Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins CD81/ Flotilin1 Characterization: Particle analysis NA NTA EM EM-type transmission EM/ immune EM Proteïns CD9 Image type Close-up

	EV150006	2/2	Homo sapiens	Serum	DG dUC Filtration	Melo SA	2015	44%
Study summary Full title Glypican-1 identifies cancer exosomes and detects early pancreatic cancer All authors Melo SA, Luecke LB, Kahlert C, Fernandez AF, Gammon ST, Kaye J, LeBleu VS, Mittendorf EA, Weitz J, Rahbari N, Reissfelder C, Pilarsky C, Fraga MF, Piwnica-Worms D, Kalluri R Journal Nature Abstract Exosomes are lipid-bilayer-enclosed extracellular vesicles that contain proteins and nucleic acids. (show more...)Exosomes are lipid-bilayer-enclosed extracellular vesicles that contain proteins and nucleic acids. They are secreted by all cells and circulate in the blood. Specific detection and isolation of cancer-cell-derived exosomes in the circulation is currently lacking. Using mass spectrometry analyses, we identify a cell surface proteoglycan, glypican-1 (GPC1), specifically enriched on cancer-cell-derived exosomes. GPC1(+) circulating exosomes (crExos) were monitored and isolated using flow cytometry from the serum of patients and mice with cancer. GPC1(+) crExos were detected in the serum of patients with pancreatic cancer with absolute specificity and sensitivity, distinguishing healthy subjects and patients with a benign pancreatic disease from patients with early- and late-stage pancreatic cancer. Levels of GPC1(+) crExos correlate with tumour burden and the survival of pre- and post-surgical patients. GPC1(+) crExos from patients and from mice with spontaneous pancreatic tumours carry specific KRAS mutations, and reliably detect pancreatic intraepithelial lesions in mice despite negative signals by magnetic resonance imaging. GPC1(+) crExos may serve as a potential non-invasive diagnostic and screening tool to detect early stages of pancreatic cancer to facilitate possible curative surgical therapy. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (92nd 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) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography DG + dUC + Filtration Protein markers EV: Flotilin1 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 Equal to or above 150,000 g Pelleting: time(min) 960 Wash: volume per pellet (ml) 11 Density gradient Only used for validation of main results 1 Density medium Sucrose Lowest density fraction 0.25 Highest density fraction 2 Orientation Bottom-up Speed (g) 150000 Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins Flotilin1 Characterization: Particle analysis NA NTA EM EM-type transmission EM/ immune EM Proteïns CD9 Image type Close-up

	EV150007	3/10	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	dUC Filtration	Lobb RJ	2015	44%
Study summary Full title Optimized exosome isolation protocol for cell culture supernatant and human plasma All authors Lobb RJ, Becker M, Wen SW, Wong CS, Wiegmans AP, Leimgruber A, Möller A Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract Extracellular vesicles represent a rich source of novel biomarkers in the diagnosis and prognosis of (show more...)Extracellular vesicles represent a rich source of novel biomarkers in the diagnosis and prognosis of disease. However, there is currently limited information elucidating the most efficient methods for obtaining high yields of pure exosomes, a subset of extracellular vesicles, from cell culture supernatant and complex biological fluids such as plasma. To this end, we comprehensively characterize a variety of exosome isolation protocols for their efficiency, yield and purity of isolated exosomes. Repeated ultracentrifugation steps can reduce the quality of exosome preparations leading to lower exosome yield. We show that concentration of cell culture conditioned media using ultrafiltration devices results in increased vesicle isolation when compared to traditional ultracentrifugation protocols. However, our data on using conditioned media isolated from the Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) SK-MES-1 cell line demonstrates that the choice of concentrating device can greatly impact the yield of isolated exosomes. We find that centrifuge-based concentrating methods are more appropriate than pressure-driven concentrating devices and allow the rapid isolation of exosomes from both NSCLC cell culture conditioned media and complex biological fluids. In fact to date, no protocol detailing exosome isolation utilizing current commercial methods from both cells and patient samples has been described. Utilizing tunable resistive pulse sensing and protein analysis, we provide a comparative analysis of 4 exosome isolation techniques, indicating their efficacy and preparation purity. Our results demonstrate that current precipitation protocols for the isolation of exosomes from cell culture conditioned media and plasma provide the least pure preparations of exosomes, whereas size exclusion isolation is comparable to density gradient purification of exosomes. We have identified current shortcomings in common extracellular vesicle isolation methods and provide a potential standardized method that is effective, reproducible and can be utilized for various starting materials. We believe this method will have extensive application in the growing field of extracellular vesicle research. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (79th 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 Cell culture supernatant 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) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography dUC + Filtration Adj. k-factor 157.1 (pelleting) / 157.1 (washing) Protein markers EV: TSG101/ HSP70/ Flotilin1 non-EV: Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens 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 100,000 g and 150,000 g Pelleting: time(min) 90 Pelleting: rotor type 50.2Ti Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 157.1 Wash: volume per pellet (ml) 1 Wash: Rotor Type 50.2Ti Wash: adjusted k-factor 157.1 Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins Flotilin1/ HSP70/ TSG101 Characterization: Particle analysis NA TRPS EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Wide-field

	EV150011	1/1	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	DG dUC	Lazar I	2015	44%
Study summary Full title Proteome characterization of melanoma exosomes reveals a specific signature for metastatic cell lines All authors Lazar I, Clement E, Ducoux-Petit M, Denat L, Soldan V, Dauvillier S, Balor S, Burlet-Schiltz O, Larue L, Muller C, Nieto L Journal Pigm Cell Melanoma R Abstract Exosomes are important mediators in cell-to-cell communication and, recently, their role in melanoma (show more...)Exosomes are important mediators in cell-to-cell communication and, recently, their role in melanoma progression has been brought to light. Here, we characterized exosomes secreted by seven melanoma cell lines with varying degrees of aggressivity. Extensive proteomic analysis of their exosomes confirmed the presence of characteristic exosomal markers as well as melanoma-specific antigens and oncogenic proteins. Importantly, the protein composition differed among exosomes from different lines. Exosomes from aggressive cells contained specific proteins involved in cell motility, angiogenesis, and immune response, while these proteins were less abundant or absent in exosomes from less aggressive cells. Interestingly, when exposed to exosomes from metastatic lines, less aggressive cells increased their migratory capacities, likely due to transfer of pro-migratory exosomal proteins to recipient cells. Hence, this study shows that the specific protein composition of melanoma exosomes depends on the cells' aggressivity and suggests that exosomes influence the behavior of other tumor cells and their microenvironment. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (79th 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 Cell culture supernatant 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) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography DG + dUC Protein markers EV: CD81/ TSG101/ Flotilin1 non-EV: Proteomics yes EV density (g/ml) 1.13-1.19 Show all info Study aim Biomarker Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium EV Depleted Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Pelleting: time(min) 90 Density gradient Only used for validation of main results 1 Density medium Sucrose Lowest density fraction 0.25 Highest density fraction 2.5 Orientation Top-down Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins CD81/ Flotilin1/ TSG101 Characterization: Particle analysis NA EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Close-up

	EV150005	2/2	Mus musculus	Cell culture supernatant	dUC Filtration	Nojima H	2015	44%
Study summary Full title Hepatocyte exosomes mediate liver repair and regeneration via sphingosine-1-phosphate All authors Nojima H, Freeman CM, Schuster RM, Japtok L, Kleuser B, Edwards MJ, Gulbins E, Lentsch AB Journal J Hepatol Abstract BACKGROUND & AIMS: Exosomes are small membrane vesicles involved in intercellular communication. Hep (show more...)BACKGROUND & AIMS: Exosomes are small membrane vesicles involved in intercellular communication. Hepatocytes are known to release exosomes, but little is known about their biological function. We sought to determine if exosomes derived from hepatocytes contribute to liver repair and regeneration after injury. METHODS: Exosomes derived from primary murine hepatocytes were isolated and characterized biochemically and biophysically. Using cultures of primary hepatocytes, we tested whether hepatocyte exosomes induced proliferation of hepatocytes in vitro. Using models of ischemia/reperfusion injury and partial hepatectomy, we evaluated whether hepatocyte exosomes promote hepatocyte proliferation and liver regeneration in vivo. RESULTS: Hepatocyte exosomes, but not exosomes from other liver cell types, induce dose-dependent hepatocyte proliferation in vitro and in vivo. Mechanistically, hepatocyte exosomes directly fuse with target hepatocytes and transfer neutral ceramidase and sphingosine kinase 2 (SK2) causing increased synthesis of sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) within target hepatocytes. Ablation of exosomal SK prevents the proliferative effect of exosomes. After ischemia/reperfusion injury, the number of circulating exosomes with proliferative effects increases. CONCLUSIONS: Our data shows that hepatocyte-derived exosomes deliver the synthetic machinery to form S1P in target hepatocytes resulting in cell proliferation and liver regeneration after ischemia/reperfusion injury or partial hepatectomy. These findings represent a potentially novel new contributing mechanism of liver regeneration and have important implications for new therapeutic approaches to acute and chronic liver disease. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (79th 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 Cell culture supernatant 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) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography dUC + Filtration Protein markers EV: CD81/ TSG101/ CD63 non-EV: Beta-actin/ Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Function 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: time(min) 70 Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins CD63/ CD81/ TSG101 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein/ Beta-actin Characterization: Particle analysis NA DLS EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Close-up, Wide-field

	EV150024	1/2	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	dUC	Hazan-Halevy I	2015	44%
Study summary Full title Cell-specific uptake of mantle cell lymphoma-derived exosomes by malignant and non-malignant B-lymphocytes All authors Hazan-Halevy I, Rosenblum D, Weinstein S, Bairey O, Raanani P, Peer D Journal Cancer Lett Abstract Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is an aggressive and incurable mature B cell neoplasm. The current treatm (show more...)Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is an aggressive and incurable mature B cell neoplasm. The current treatments are based on chemotherapeutics and new class of drugs (e.g. Ibrutinib(®)), which in most cases ends with tumor resistance and relapse. Therefore, further development of novel therapeutic modalities is needed. Exosomes are natural extracellular vesicles, which play an important role in intercellular communication. The specificity of exosome uptake by different target cells remains unknown. In this study, we observed that MCL exosomes are taken up rapidly and preferentially by MCL cells. Only a minor fraction of exosomes was internalized into T-cell leukemia and bone marrow stroma cell lines, when these cells were co-cultured with MCL cells. Moreover, MCL patients' exosomes were taken up by both healthy and patients' B-lymphocytes with no apparent internalization to T lymphocytes and NK cells. Exosome internalization was not inhibited by specific siRNA against caveolin1 and clathrin but was found to be mediated by a cholesterol-dependent pathway. These findings demonstrate natural specificity of exosomes to B-lymphocytes and ultimately might be used for therapeutic intervention in B cells malignancies. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (79th 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 Cell culture supernatant 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) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography dUC Protein markers EV: CD81/ TSG101/ CD63/ CD19 non-EV: Calnexin Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Function 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: time(min) 70 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins CD63/ CD81/ TSG101/ CD19 Detected contaminants Calnexin ELISA Detected EV-associated proteins CD19 Flow cytometry specific beads Selected surface protein(s) Yes Characterization: Particle analysis NA NTA Particle analysis: flow cytometry EM EM-type transmission EM/ immune EM Proteïns CD81 Image type Close-up

	EV150039	1/1	Homo sapiens	Semen	DG dUC	Dubois L	2015	44%
Study summary Full title Proteomic profiling of detergent resistant membranes (lipid rafts) of prostasomes All authors Dubois L, Ronquist KK, Ek B, Ronquist G, Larsson A Journal Mol Cell Proteomics Abstract Prostasomes are exosomes derived from prostate epithelial cells through exocytosis by multivesicular (show more...)Prostasomes are exosomes derived from prostate epithelial cells through exocytosis by multivesicular bodies. Prostasomes have a bilayered membrane and readily interact with sperm. The membrane lipid composition is unusual with a high contribution of sphingomyelin at the expense of phosphatidylcholine and saturated and monounsaturated fatty acids are dominant. Lipid rafts are liquid-ordered domains that are more tightly packed than the surrounding nonraft phase of the bilayer. Lipid rafts are proposed to be highly dynamic, submicroscopic assemblies that float freely within the liquid disordered membrane bilayer and some proteins preferentially partition into the ordered raft domains. We asked the question whether lipid rafts do exist in prostasomes and, if so, which proteins might be associated with them. Prostasomes of density range 1.13-1.19g/ml were subjected to density gradient ultracentrifugation in sucrose fabricated by phosphate buffered saline (PBS) containing 1% Triton X-100 with capacity for banding at 1.10 g/ml, i.e. the classical density of lipid rafts. Prepared prostasomal lipid rafts (by gradient ultracentrifugation) were analyzed by mass spectrometry. The clearly visible band on top of 1.10g/ml sucrose in the Triton X-100 containing gradient was subjected to liquid chromatography-tandem MS and more than 370 lipid raft associated proteins were identified. Several of them were involved in intraluminal vesicle formation, e.g. tetraspanins, ESCRTs, and Ras-related proteins. This is the first comprehensive liquid chromatography-tandem MS profiling of proteins in lipid rafts derived from exosomes. Data are available via ProteomeXchange with identifier PXD002163. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (83rd 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 Semen Sample origin DNF Focus vesicles Prostasomes 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 DG + dUC Adj. k-factor 126 (pelleting) Protein markers EV: Clathrin/ Flotilin1/ Flotillin2 non-EV: Proteomics yes EV density (g/ml) 1.13-1.19 Show all info Study aim Omics Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Semen Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Pelleting: time(min) 120 Pelleting: rotor type 90Ti Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 126.0 Density gradient Density medium Sucrose Lowest density fraction 1 Highest density fraction 2 Orientation Top-down Speed (g) 100000 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins Flotilin1/ Flotillin2/ Clathrin ELISA Detected EV-associated proteins Flotillin2/ Clathrin Characterization: Particle analysis NA

	EV150001	1/1	Homo sapiens	Urine	dUC	Lozano-Ramos I	2015	43%
Study summary Full title Size-exclusion chromatography-based enrichment of extracellular vesicles from urine samples All authors Lozano-Ramos I, Bancu I, Oliveira-Tercero A, Armengol MP, Menezes-Neto A, Del Portillo HA, Lauzurica-Valdemoros R, Borràs FE Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract Renal biopsy is the gold-standard procedure to diagnose most of renal pathologies. However, this inv (show more...)Renal biopsy is the gold-standard procedure to diagnose most of renal pathologies. However, this invasive method is of limited repeatability and often describes an irreversible renal damage. Urine is an easily accessible fluid and urinary extracellular vesicles (EVs) may be ideal to describe new biomarkers associated with renal pathologies. Several methods to enrich EVs have been described. Most of them contain a mixture of proteins, lipoproteins and cell debris that may be masking relevant biomarkers. Here, we evaluated size-exclusion chromatography (SEC) as a suitable method to isolate urinary EVs. Following a conventional centrifugation to eliminate cell debris and apoptotic bodies, urine samples were concentrated using ultrafiltration and loaded on a SEC column. Collected fractions were analysed by protein content and flow cytometry to determine the presence of tetraspanin markers (CD63 and CD9). The highest tetraspanin content was routinely detected in fractions well before the bulk of proteins eluted. These tetraspanin-peak fractions were analysed by cryo-electron microscopy (cryo-EM) and nanoparticle tracking analysis revealing the presence of EVs.When analysed by sodium dodecyl sulphate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis, tetraspanin-peak fractions from urine concentrated samples contained multiple bands but the main urine proteins (such as Tamm-Horsfall protein) were absent. Furthermore, a preliminary proteomic study of these fractions revealed the presence of EV-related proteins, suggesting their enrichment in concentrated samples. In addition, RNA profiling also showed the presence of vesicular small RNA species.To summarize, our results demonstrated that concentrated urine followed by SEC is a suitable option to isolate EVs with low presence of soluble contaminants. This methodology could permit more accurate analyses of EV-related biomarkers when further characterized by -omics technologies compared with other approaches. (hide) EV-METRIC 43% (74th 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 Urine Sample origin DNF Focus vesicles extracellular 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 dUC Protein markers EV: CD63/ CD9 non-EV: Tamm-Horsfall glycoprotein/ Albumin Proteomics no TEM measurements 80-120 Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Urine Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Characterization: Particle analysis NA NTA EM EM-type cryo EM Image type Close-up, Wide-field

	EV150018	2/2	Mus musculus	Brain tissue	DG dUC IAF	Asai H	2015	43%
Study summary Full title Depletion of microglia and inhibition of exosome synthesis halt tau propagation All authors Asai H, Ikezu S, Tsunoda S, Medalla M, Luebke J, Haydar T, Wolozin B, Butovsky O, Kügler S, Ikezu T Journal Nat Neurosci Abstract Accumulation of pathological tau protein is a major hallmark of Alzheimer's disease. Tau protein spr (show more...)Accumulation of pathological tau protein is a major hallmark of Alzheimer's disease. Tau protein spreads from the entorhinal cortex to the hippocampal region early in the disease. Microglia, the primary phagocytes in the brain, are positively correlated with tau pathology, but their involvement in tau propagation is unknown. We developed an adeno-associated virus-based model exhibiting rapid tau propagation from the entorhinal cortex to the dentate gyrus in 4 weeks. We found that depleting microglia dramatically suppressed the propagation of tau and reduced excitability in the dentate gyrus in this mouse model. Moreover, we demonstrate that microglia spread tau via exosome secretion, and inhibiting exosome synthesis significantly reduced tau propagation in vitro and in vivo. These data suggest that microglia and exosomes contribute to the progression of tauopathy and that the exosome secretion pathway may be a therapeutic target. (hide) EV-METRIC 43% (75th 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 Brain tissue 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) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography DG + dUC + IAF Protein markers EV: AChE non-EV: Proteomics no TEM measurements 106.4+-29.6 Show all info Study aim Function Sample Species Mus musculus Sample Type Brain tissue 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: time(min) 70 Wash: volume per pellet (ml) 60 Density gradient Only used for validation of main results 1 Density medium Sucrose Lowest density fraction 0.25 Highest density fraction 2 Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins AChE ELISA Detected EV-associated proteins AChE Characterization: Particle analysis NA EM EM-type immune EM Proteïns Tsg101 Image type Close-up

	EV150007	2/10	Homo sapiens	Blood plasma	dUC qEV	Lobb RJ	2015	38%
Study summary Full title Optimized exosome isolation protocol for cell culture supernatant and human plasma All authors Lobb RJ, Becker M, Wen SW, Wong CS, Wiegmans AP, Leimgruber A, Möller A Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract Extracellular vesicles represent a rich source of novel biomarkers in the diagnosis and prognosis of (show more...)Extracellular vesicles represent a rich source of novel biomarkers in the diagnosis and prognosis of disease. However, there is currently limited information elucidating the most efficient methods for obtaining high yields of pure exosomes, a subset of extracellular vesicles, from cell culture supernatant and complex biological fluids such as plasma. To this end, we comprehensively characterize a variety of exosome isolation protocols for their efficiency, yield and purity of isolated exosomes. Repeated ultracentrifugation steps can reduce the quality of exosome preparations leading to lower exosome yield. We show that concentration of cell culture conditioned media using ultrafiltration devices results in increased vesicle isolation when compared to traditional ultracentrifugation protocols. However, our data on using conditioned media isolated from the Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) SK-MES-1 cell line demonstrates that the choice of concentrating device can greatly impact the yield of isolated exosomes. We find that centrifuge-based concentrating methods are more appropriate than pressure-driven concentrating devices and allow the rapid isolation of exosomes from both NSCLC cell culture conditioned media and complex biological fluids. In fact to date, no protocol detailing exosome isolation utilizing current commercial methods from both cells and patient samples has been described. Utilizing tunable resistive pulse sensing and protein analysis, we provide a comparative analysis of 4 exosome isolation techniques, indicating their efficacy and preparation purity. Our results demonstrate that current precipitation protocols for the isolation of exosomes from cell culture conditioned media and plasma provide the least pure preparations of exosomes, whereas size exclusion isolation is comparable to density gradient purification of exosomes. We have identified current shortcomings in common extracellular vesicle isolation methods and provide a potential standardized method that is effective, reproducible and can be utilized for various starting materials. We believe this method will have extensive application in the growing field of extracellular vesicle research. (hide) EV-METRIC 38% (82nd 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 Blood plasma 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) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography dUC + qEV Protein markers EV: Flotilin1 non-EV: Albumin/ Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Blood plasma Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Commercial kit qEV Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins Flotilin1 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein/ Albumin Characterization: Particle analysis NA TRPS EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Wide-field

	EV150007	9/10	Homo sapiens	Blood plasma	dUC ExoQuick Filtration	Lobb RJ	2015	38%
Study summary Full title Optimized exosome isolation protocol for cell culture supernatant and human plasma All authors Lobb RJ, Becker M, Wen SW, Wong CS, Wiegmans AP, Leimgruber A, Möller A Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract Extracellular vesicles represent a rich source of novel biomarkers in the diagnosis and prognosis of (show more...)Extracellular vesicles represent a rich source of novel biomarkers in the diagnosis and prognosis of disease. However, there is currently limited information elucidating the most efficient methods for obtaining high yields of pure exosomes, a subset of extracellular vesicles, from cell culture supernatant and complex biological fluids such as plasma. To this end, we comprehensively characterize a variety of exosome isolation protocols for their efficiency, yield and purity of isolated exosomes. Repeated ultracentrifugation steps can reduce the quality of exosome preparations leading to lower exosome yield. We show that concentration of cell culture conditioned media using ultrafiltration devices results in increased vesicle isolation when compared to traditional ultracentrifugation protocols. However, our data on using conditioned media isolated from the Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) SK-MES-1 cell line demonstrates that the choice of concentrating device can greatly impact the yield of isolated exosomes. We find that centrifuge-based concentrating methods are more appropriate than pressure-driven concentrating devices and allow the rapid isolation of exosomes from both NSCLC cell culture conditioned media and complex biological fluids. In fact to date, no protocol detailing exosome isolation utilizing current commercial methods from both cells and patient samples has been described. Utilizing tunable resistive pulse sensing and protein analysis, we provide a comparative analysis of 4 exosome isolation techniques, indicating their efficacy and preparation purity. Our results demonstrate that current precipitation protocols for the isolation of exosomes from cell culture conditioned media and plasma provide the least pure preparations of exosomes, whereas size exclusion isolation is comparable to density gradient purification of exosomes. We have identified current shortcomings in common extracellular vesicle isolation methods and provide a potential standardized method that is effective, reproducible and can be utilized for various starting materials. We believe this method will have extensive application in the growing field of extracellular vesicle research. (hide) EV-METRIC 38% (82nd 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 Blood plasma 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) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography dUC + ExoQuick + Filtration Protein markers EV: Flotilin1 non-EV: Albumin/ Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Blood plasma Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Commercial kit ExoQuick Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins Flotilin1 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein/ Albumin Characterization: Particle analysis NA TRPS EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Close-up

	EV150007	10/10	Homo sapiens	Blood plasma	dUC Exo-spin Filtration	Lobb RJ	2015	38%
Study summary Full title Optimized exosome isolation protocol for cell culture supernatant and human plasma All authors Lobb RJ, Becker M, Wen SW, Wong CS, Wiegmans AP, Leimgruber A, Möller A Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract Extracellular vesicles represent a rich source of novel biomarkers in the diagnosis and prognosis of (show more...)Extracellular vesicles represent a rich source of novel biomarkers in the diagnosis and prognosis of disease. However, there is currently limited information elucidating the most efficient methods for obtaining high yields of pure exosomes, a subset of extracellular vesicles, from cell culture supernatant and complex biological fluids such as plasma. To this end, we comprehensively characterize a variety of exosome isolation protocols for their efficiency, yield and purity of isolated exosomes. Repeated ultracentrifugation steps can reduce the quality of exosome preparations leading to lower exosome yield. We show that concentration of cell culture conditioned media using ultrafiltration devices results in increased vesicle isolation when compared to traditional ultracentrifugation protocols. However, our data on using conditioned media isolated from the Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) SK-MES-1 cell line demonstrates that the choice of concentrating device can greatly impact the yield of isolated exosomes. We find that centrifuge-based concentrating methods are more appropriate than pressure-driven concentrating devices and allow the rapid isolation of exosomes from both NSCLC cell culture conditioned media and complex biological fluids. In fact to date, no protocol detailing exosome isolation utilizing current commercial methods from both cells and patient samples has been described. Utilizing tunable resistive pulse sensing and protein analysis, we provide a comparative analysis of 4 exosome isolation techniques, indicating their efficacy and preparation purity. Our results demonstrate that current precipitation protocols for the isolation of exosomes from cell culture conditioned media and plasma provide the least pure preparations of exosomes, whereas size exclusion isolation is comparable to density gradient purification of exosomes. We have identified current shortcomings in common extracellular vesicle isolation methods and provide a potential standardized method that is effective, reproducible and can be utilized for various starting materials. We believe this method will have extensive application in the growing field of extracellular vesicle research. (hide) EV-METRIC 38% (82nd 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 Blood plasma 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) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography dUC + Exo-spin + Filtration Protein markers EV: Flotilin1 non-EV: Albumin/ Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Blood plasma Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Commercial kit Exo-spin Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins Flotilin1 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein/ Albumin Characterization: Particle analysis NA TRPS EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Wide-field

	EV150005	1/2	Mus musculus	Serum	ExoQuick	Nojima H	2015	38%
Study summary Full title Hepatocyte exosomes mediate liver repair and regeneration via sphingosine-1-phosphate All authors Nojima H, Freeman CM, Schuster RM, Japtok L, Kleuser B, Edwards MJ, Gulbins E, Lentsch AB Journal J Hepatol Abstract BACKGROUND & AIMS: Exosomes are small membrane vesicles involved in intercellular communication. Hep (show more...)BACKGROUND & AIMS: Exosomes are small membrane vesicles involved in intercellular communication. Hepatocytes are known to release exosomes, but little is known about their biological function. We sought to determine if exosomes derived from hepatocytes contribute to liver repair and regeneration after injury. METHODS: Exosomes derived from primary murine hepatocytes were isolated and characterized biochemically and biophysically. Using cultures of primary hepatocytes, we tested whether hepatocyte exosomes induced proliferation of hepatocytes in vitro. Using models of ischemia/reperfusion injury and partial hepatectomy, we evaluated whether hepatocyte exosomes promote hepatocyte proliferation and liver regeneration in vivo. RESULTS: Hepatocyte exosomes, but not exosomes from other liver cell types, induce dose-dependent hepatocyte proliferation in vitro and in vivo. Mechanistically, hepatocyte exosomes directly fuse with target hepatocytes and transfer neutral ceramidase and sphingosine kinase 2 (SK2) causing increased synthesis of sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) within target hepatocytes. Ablation of exosomal SK prevents the proliferative effect of exosomes. After ischemia/reperfusion injury, the number of circulating exosomes with proliferative effects increases. CONCLUSIONS: Our data shows that hepatocyte-derived exosomes deliver the synthetic machinery to form S1P in target hepatocytes resulting in cell proliferation and liver regeneration after ischemia/reperfusion injury or partial hepatectomy. These findings represent a potentially novel new contributing mechanism of liver regeneration and have important implications for new therapeutic approaches to acute and chronic liver disease. (hide) EV-METRIC 38% (90th 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) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography ExoQuick Protein markers EV: CD81/ TSG101/ CD63 non-EV: Beta-actin/ Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Function Sample Species Mus musculus Sample Type Serum Separation Method Commercial kit ExoQuick Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins CD63/ CD81/ TSG101 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein/ Beta-actin Characterization: Particle analysis NA DLS EM EM-type transmission EM Image type Close-up

	EV150004	2/2	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	Filtration qEV	Clark DJ	2015	38%
Study summary Full title Redefining the Breast Cancer Exosome Proteome by Tandem Mass Tag Quantitative Proteomics and Multivariate Cluster Analysis All authors Clark DJ, Fondrie WE, Liao Z, Hanson PI, Fulton A, Mao L, Yang AJ Journal Anal Chem Abstract Exosomes are microvesicles of endocytic origin constitutively released by multiple cell types into t (show more...)Exosomes are microvesicles of endocytic origin constitutively released by multiple cell types into the extracellular environment. With evidence that exosomes can be detected in the blood of patients with various malignancies, the development of a platform that uses exosomes as a diagnostic tool has been proposed. However, it has been difficult to truly define the exosome proteome due to the challenge of discerning contaminant proteins that may be identified via mass spectrometry using various exosome enrichment strategies. To better define the exosome proteome in breast cancer, we incorporated a combination of Tandem-Mass-Tag (TMT) quantitative proteomics approach and Support Vector Machine (SVM) cluster analysis of three conditioned media derived fractions corresponding to a 10 000g cellular debris pellet, a 100 000g crude exosome pellet, and an Optiprep enriched exosome pellet. The quantitative analysis identified 2 179 proteins in all three fractions, with known exosomal cargo proteins displaying at least a 2-fold enrichment in the exosome fraction based on the TMT protein ratios. Employing SVM cluster analysis allowed for the classification 251 proteins as true exosomal cargo proteins. This study provides a robust and vigorous framework for the future development of using exosomes as a potential multiprotein marker phenotyping tool that could be useful in breast cancer diagnosis and monitoring disease progression. (hide) EV-METRIC 38% (73rd 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 Cell culture supernatant 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) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography Filtration + qEV Protein markers EV: Alix/ CD63 non-EV: Proteomics yes Show all info Study aim Omics Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium EV Depleted Separation Method Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Commercial kit qEV Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins Alix/ CD63 Characterization: Particle analysis NA

	EV160016	2/3	Homo sapiens	Cell culture supernatant	"(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation Ultrafiltration Filtration"	Cha DJ	2015	33%
Study summary Full title KRAS-dependent sorting of miRNA to exosomes All authors Cha DJ, Franklin JL, Dou Y, Liu Q, Higginbotham JN, Demory Beckler M, Weaver AM, Vickers K, Prasad N, Levy S, Zhang B, Coffey RJ, Patton JG. Journal Elife Abstract Mutant KRAS colorectal cancer (CRC) cells release protein-laden exosomes that can alter the tumor mi (show more...)Mutant KRAS colorectal cancer (CRC) cells release protein-laden exosomes that can alter the tumor microenvironment. To test whether exosomal RNAs also contribute to changes in gene expression in recipient cells, and whether mutant KRAS might regulate the... (hide) EV-METRIC 33% (66th 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 Cell culture supernatant Sample origin Control condition Focus vesicles exosome 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 "(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation + Ultrafiltration + Filtration" Protein markers EV: "Flotillin1/ TSG101/ HSP70/ KRAS/ EGFR/ RAP1/ SRC/ LYN/ ITGB1/ ITGA2/ ITGAV/ ITGB4/ EPHA2/ EPS8/ CTNNA" non-EV: VDAC Proteomics yes Show all info Study aim Identification of content (omics approaches) Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type

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

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

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data