Search > Results

You searched for: 2016 (Year of publication)

Showing 51 - 100 of 797

Experiment number
  • If needed, multiple experiments were identified in a single publication based on differing sample types, separation protocols and/or vesicle types of interest.
Species
  • Species of origin of the EVs.
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the different steps of the separation protocol.
    • (d)(U)C = (differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
Experiment number
  • Experiments differ in Sample condition
Experiment number
  • Experiments differ in Sample condition
Experiment number
  • Experiments differ in Sample type
Experiment number
  • Experiments differ in sample type and particle analysis
Experiment number
  • Experiments differ in sample type and particle analysis
Details EV-TRACK ID Experiment nr. Species Sample type Separation protocol First author Year EV-METRIC
EV210139 3/6 Homo sapiens Huh7 (d)(U)C
Filtration
Haraszti, Reka A 2016 44%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Reka A Haraszti, Marie-Cecile Didiot, Ellen Sapp, John Leszyk, Scott A Shaffer, Hannah E Rockwell, Fei Gao, Niven R Narain, Marian DiFiglia, Michael A Kiebish, Neil Aronin, Anastasia Khvorova
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Extracellular vesicles (EVs), including exosomes and microvesicles (MVs), are explored for use in di (show more...)Extracellular vesicles (EVs), including exosomes and microvesicles (MVs), are explored for use in diagnostics, therapeutics and drug delivery. However, little is known about the relationship of protein and lipid composition of EVs and their source cells. Here, we report high-resolution lipidomic and proteomic analyses of exosomes and MVs derived by differential ultracentrifugation from 3 different cell types: U87 glioblastoma cells, Huh7 hepatocellular carcinoma cells and human bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs). We identified 3,532 proteins and 1,961 lipid species in the screen. Exosomes differed from MVs in several different areas: (a) The protein patterns of exosomes were more likely different from their cells of origin than were the protein patterns of MVs; (b) The proteomes of U87 and Huh7 exosomes were similar to each other but different from the proteomes of MSC exosomes, whereas the lipidomes of Huh7 and MSC exosomes were similar to each other but different from the lipidomes of U87 exosomes; (c) exosomes exhibited proteins of extracellular matrix, heparin-binding, receptors, immune response and cell adhesion functions, whereas MVs were enriched in endoplasmic reticulum, proteasome and mitochondrial proteins. Exosomes and MVs also differed in their types of lipid contents. Enrichment in glycolipids and free fatty acids characterized exosomes, whereas enrichment in ceramides and sphingomyelins characterized MVs. Furthermore, Huh7 and MSC exosomes were specifically enriched in cardiolipins; U87 exosomes were enriched in sphingomyelins. This study comprehensively analyses the protein and lipid composition of exosomes, MVs and source cells in 3 different cell types. (hide)
EV-METRIC
44% (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Cell culture supernatant
Sample origin
Control condition
Focus vesicles
(shedding) microvesicle
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(d)(U)C
Filtration
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ TSG101/ CD63/ CD9
non-EV: Calnexin
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
Huh7
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
overnight (16h) at >=100,000g
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: time(min)
90
Pelleting: rotor type
Not specified
Pelleting: speed (g)
10000
Filtration steps
0.22µm or 0.2µmNo
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Bradford
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
No
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD63/ CD81/ Tsg101
Not detected contaminants
Calnexin
Proteomics database
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
Yes
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Size range/distribution
Reported size (nm)
0-500
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
Not reported NA
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Wide-field
EV210139 4/6 Homo sapiens Huh7 (d)(U)C Haraszti, Reka A 2016 44%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Reka A Haraszti, Marie-Cecile Didiot, Ellen Sapp, John Leszyk, Scott A Shaffer, Hannah E Rockwell, Fei Gao, Niven R Narain, Marian DiFiglia, Michael A Kiebish, Neil Aronin, Anastasia Khvorova
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Extracellular vesicles (EVs), including exosomes and microvesicles (MVs), are explored for use in di (show more...)Extracellular vesicles (EVs), including exosomes and microvesicles (MVs), are explored for use in diagnostics, therapeutics and drug delivery. However, little is known about the relationship of protein and lipid composition of EVs and their source cells. Here, we report high-resolution lipidomic and proteomic analyses of exosomes and MVs derived by differential ultracentrifugation from 3 different cell types: U87 glioblastoma cells, Huh7 hepatocellular carcinoma cells and human bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs). We identified 3,532 proteins and 1,961 lipid species in the screen. Exosomes differed from MVs in several different areas: (a) The protein patterns of exosomes were more likely different from their cells of origin than were the protein patterns of MVs; (b) The proteomes of U87 and Huh7 exosomes were similar to each other but different from the proteomes of MSC exosomes, whereas the lipidomes of Huh7 and MSC exosomes were similar to each other but different from the lipidomes of U87 exosomes; (c) exosomes exhibited proteins of extracellular matrix, heparin-binding, receptors, immune response and cell adhesion functions, whereas MVs were enriched in endoplasmic reticulum, proteasome and mitochondrial proteins. Exosomes and MVs also differed in their types of lipid contents. Enrichment in glycolipids and free fatty acids characterized exosomes, whereas enrichment in ceramides and sphingomyelins characterized MVs. Furthermore, Huh7 and MSC exosomes were specifically enriched in cardiolipins; U87 exosomes were enriched in sphingomyelins. This study comprehensively analyses the protein and lipid composition of exosomes, MVs and source cells in 3 different cell types. (hide)
EV-METRIC
44% (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Cell culture supernatant
Sample origin
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(d)(U)C
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ TSG101/ CD63/ CD9
non-EV: Calnexin
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
Huh7
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
overnight (16h) at >=100,000g
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: time(min)
30
Pelleting: rotor type
Not specified
Pelleting: speed (g)
10000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Bradford
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
No
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD63/ CD81
Not detected EV-associated proteins
Tsg101
Detected contaminants
Calnexin
Proteomics database
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
Yes
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Size range/distribution
Reported size (nm)
0-750
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
Not reported NA
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Wide-field
EV210139 5/6 Homo sapiens Bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (d)(U)C
Filtration
Haraszti, Reka A 2016 44%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Reka A Haraszti, Marie-Cecile Didiot, Ellen Sapp, John Leszyk, Scott A Shaffer, Hannah E Rockwell, Fei Gao, Niven R Narain, Marian DiFiglia, Michael A Kiebish, Neil Aronin, Anastasia Khvorova
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Extracellular vesicles (EVs), including exosomes and microvesicles (MVs), are explored for use in di (show more...)Extracellular vesicles (EVs), including exosomes and microvesicles (MVs), are explored for use in diagnostics, therapeutics and drug delivery. However, little is known about the relationship of protein and lipid composition of EVs and their source cells. Here, we report high-resolution lipidomic and proteomic analyses of exosomes and MVs derived by differential ultracentrifugation from 3 different cell types: U87 glioblastoma cells, Huh7 hepatocellular carcinoma cells and human bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs). We identified 3,532 proteins and 1,961 lipid species in the screen. Exosomes differed from MVs in several different areas: (a) The protein patterns of exosomes were more likely different from their cells of origin than were the protein patterns of MVs; (b) The proteomes of U87 and Huh7 exosomes were similar to each other but different from the proteomes of MSC exosomes, whereas the lipidomes of Huh7 and MSC exosomes were similar to each other but different from the lipidomes of U87 exosomes; (c) exosomes exhibited proteins of extracellular matrix, heparin-binding, receptors, immune response and cell adhesion functions, whereas MVs were enriched in endoplasmic reticulum, proteasome and mitochondrial proteins. Exosomes and MVs also differed in their types of lipid contents. Enrichment in glycolipids and free fatty acids characterized exosomes, whereas enrichment in ceramides and sphingomyelins characterized MVs. Furthermore, Huh7 and MSC exosomes were specifically enriched in cardiolipins; U87 exosomes were enriched in sphingomyelins. This study comprehensively analyses the protein and lipid composition of exosomes, MVs and source cells in 3 different cell types. (hide)
EV-METRIC
44% (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Cell culture supernatant
Sample origin
Control condition
Focus vesicles
(shedding) microvesicle
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(d)(U)C
Filtration
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ TSG101/ CD63/ CD9
non-EV: Calnexin
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
Bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
overnight (16h) at >=100,000g
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: time(min)
90
Pelleting: rotor type
Not specified
Pelleting: speed (g)
10000
Filtration steps
0.22µm or 0.2µmNo
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Bradford
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
No
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD63/ CD81
Not detected EV-associated proteins
Tsg101
Not detected contaminants
Calnexin
Proteomics database
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
Yes
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Size range/distribution
Reported size (nm)
0-500
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
Not reported NA
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Wide-field
EV210139 6/6 Homo sapiens Bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (d)(U)C Haraszti, Reka A 2016 44%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Reka A Haraszti, Marie-Cecile Didiot, Ellen Sapp, John Leszyk, Scott A Shaffer, Hannah E Rockwell, Fei Gao, Niven R Narain, Marian DiFiglia, Michael A Kiebish, Neil Aronin, Anastasia Khvorova
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Extracellular vesicles (EVs), including exosomes and microvesicles (MVs), are explored for use in di (show more...)Extracellular vesicles (EVs), including exosomes and microvesicles (MVs), are explored for use in diagnostics, therapeutics and drug delivery. However, little is known about the relationship of protein and lipid composition of EVs and their source cells. Here, we report high-resolution lipidomic and proteomic analyses of exosomes and MVs derived by differential ultracentrifugation from 3 different cell types: U87 glioblastoma cells, Huh7 hepatocellular carcinoma cells and human bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs). We identified 3,532 proteins and 1,961 lipid species in the screen. Exosomes differed from MVs in several different areas: (a) The protein patterns of exosomes were more likely different from their cells of origin than were the protein patterns of MVs; (b) The proteomes of U87 and Huh7 exosomes were similar to each other but different from the proteomes of MSC exosomes, whereas the lipidomes of Huh7 and MSC exosomes were similar to each other but different from the lipidomes of U87 exosomes; (c) exosomes exhibited proteins of extracellular matrix, heparin-binding, receptors, immune response and cell adhesion functions, whereas MVs were enriched in endoplasmic reticulum, proteasome and mitochondrial proteins. Exosomes and MVs also differed in their types of lipid contents. Enrichment in glycolipids and free fatty acids characterized exosomes, whereas enrichment in ceramides and sphingomyelins characterized MVs. Furthermore, Huh7 and MSC exosomes were specifically enriched in cardiolipins; U87 exosomes were enriched in sphingomyelins. This study comprehensively analyses the protein and lipid composition of exosomes, MVs and source cells in 3 different cell types. (hide)
EV-METRIC
44% (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Cell culture supernatant
Sample origin
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(d)(U)C
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ TSG101/ CD63/ CD9
non-EV: Calnexin
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
Bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
overnight (16h) at >=100,000g
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: time(min)
30
Pelleting: rotor type
Not specified
Pelleting: speed (g)
10000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Bradford
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
No
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD63/ CD81
Not detected EV-associated proteins
Tsg101
Detected contaminants
Calnexin
Proteomics database
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
Yes
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Size range/distribution
Reported size (nm)
0-750
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
Not reported
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Wide-field
EV210099 1/9 Homo sapiens HEK293 T (d)(U)C Rider, Mark A 2016 44%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Mark A Rider, Stephanie N Hurwitz, David G Meckes Jr
Journal
Sci Rep
Abstract
Initially thought to be a means for cells to eliminate waste, secreted extracellular vesicles, known (show more...)Initially thought to be a means for cells to eliminate waste, secreted extracellular vesicles, known as exosomes, are now understood to mediate numerous healthy and pathological processes. Though abundant in biological fluids, purifying exosomes has been challenging because their biophysical properties overlap with other secreted cell products. Easy-to-use commercial kits for harvesting exosomes are now widely used, but the relative low-purity and high-cost of the preparations restricts their utility. Here we describe a method for purifying exosomes and other extracellular vesicles by adapting methods for isolating viruses using polyethylene glycol. This technique, called ExtraPEG, enriches exosomes from large volumes of media rapidly and inexpensively using low-speed centrifugation, followed by a single small-volume ultracentrifugation purification step. Total protein and RNA harvested from vesicles is sufficient in quantity and quality for proteomics and sequencing analyses, demonstrating the utility of this method for biomarker discovery and diagnostics. Additionally, confocal microscopy studies suggest that the biological activity of vesicles is not impaired. The ExtraPEG method can be easily adapted to enrich for different vesicle populations, or as an efficient precursor to subsequent purification techniques, providing a means to harvest exosomes from many different biological fluids and for a wide variety of purposes. (hide)
EV-METRIC
44% (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Cell culture supernatant
Sample origin
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(d)(U)C
Protein markers
EV: CD63/ TSG101/ HSP70/ Alix
non-EV: None
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
New methodological development/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-­related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
HEK293 T
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
>=18h at >= 100,000g
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: time(min)
70
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 28
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
1
Wash: time (min)
70
Wash: Rotor Type
TLA120.2
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Fluorometric assay (e.g. Qubit, NanoOrange,...)
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
No
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ TSG101/ HSP70/ Alix
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
Capillary electrophoresis (e.g. Bioanalyzer)
Database
No
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Not Reported
Particle yield
NA NA
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up
Report size (nm)
Not specified
EV200178 2/4 Homo sapiens Blood plasma (d)(U)C
DC
Filtration
Pillay, Preenan 2016 44%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Preenan Pillay, Niren Maharaj, Jagidesa Moodley, Irene Mackraj
Journal
Placenta
Abstract
Introduction and aim: Exosomes are a subtype of extracellular vesicle (20-130 nm) released by biolog (show more...)Introduction and aim: Exosomes are a subtype of extracellular vesicle (20-130 nm) released by biological cells under normal and pathological conditions. Although there have been reports of circulating exosomes in normal pregnancy, the relevance of placental-derived exosomes in normal and abnormal pregnancies still needs to be elucidated. The aim of this study was to quantify total and placental-derived exosomes in maternal plasma from normal (N), early onset- and late onset-preeclampsia (PE). Method: Plasma samples were obtained from pregnant women in the third trimester, for the isolation of exosomes by differential ultracentrifugation. Total exosomes were quantified using nanoparticle tracking analysis and immuno-reactive exosomal CD63 quantification. Placental-derived exosomes were quantified using placental alkaline phosphatase (PLAP) as a specific marker. The contribution of placental-derived exosomes to total exosomes in maternal plasma was determined by the ratio of PLAP+ exosomes to CD63+ exosomes. Results: The concentration of total exosomes significantly increased in early onset-PE and late onset-PE compared to N (≤33 weeks) and N (≥34 weeks). The relative concentration of placental-derived exosomes significantly increased in early onset-PE but decreased in late onset-PE compared to N. The ratio of PLAP+ exosomes to total number of exosomes significantly decreased in early onset-PE and late onset-PE. A positive correlation between total and placental-derived exosomes were obtained in N (≤33 weeks: Pearson's r = 0.60, ≥34 weeks: Pearson's r = 0.67) and early onset-PE (Pearson's r = 0.51, p < 0.05) with the inverse in late onset-PE (Pearson's r = -0.62, p < 0.01). Conclusion: The differences in the contribution of placental-derived exosomes to total exosomes in maternal circulation suggests a possible pathophysiological role of placental-derived exosomes in pre-eclampsia. (hide)
EV-METRIC
44% (77th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type)
 Reported
 Not reported
 Not applicable
EV-enriched proteins
Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins
non EV-enriched protein
Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein
qualitative and quantitative analysis
Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Blood plasma
Sample origin
Normal pregnancy (>34 weeks gestation)
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Density cushion
Filtration
Protein markers
EV: PLAP/ CD63
non-EV: None
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function/Biomarker
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
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: time(min)
70
Pelleting: rotor type
MLA-55
Pelleting: speed (g)
110000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
Not specified
Wash: time (min)
70
Wash: Rotor Type
MLA-55
Wash: speed (g)
110000
Filtration steps
0.22µm or 0.2µm
Density cushion
Density medium
Sucrose
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Lowry
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63
ELISA
Antibody details provided?
No
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ PLAP
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
100.3 + - 7.78 nm
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Wide-field
EV160009 1/2 Homo sapiens BEAS2B (d)(U)C
Filtration
Benedikter BJ 2016 44%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Benedikter BJ, Volgers C, van Eijck PH, Wouters EFM, Savelkoul PHM, Reynaert NL, Haenen GRMM, Rohde GGU, Weseler AR, Stassen FRM
Journal
J Cell Sci
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Airway epithelial cells have been described to release extracellular vesicles (EVs) wi (show more...)INTRODUCTION: Airway epithelial cells have been described to release extracellular vesicles (EVs) with pathological properties when exposed to cigarette smoke extract (CSE). As CSE causes oxidative stress, we investigated whether its oxidative components are responsible for inducing EV release and whether this could be prevented using the thiol antioxidants N-acetyl-l-cysteine (NAC) or glutathione (GSH). METHODS: BEAS-2B cells were exposed for 24h to CSE, H2O2, acrolein, 5,5'-dithiobis-(2-nitrobenzoic acid) (DTNB), bacitracin, rutin or the anti-protein disulfide isomerase (PDI) antibody clone RL90; with or without NAC or GSH. EVs in media were measured using CD63+CD81+ bead-coupled flow cytometry or tunable resistive pulse sensing (TRPS). For characterization by Western Blotting, cryo-transmission electron microscopy and TRPS, EVs were isolated using ultracentrifugation. Glutathione disulfide and GSH in cells were assessed by a GSH reductase cycling assay, and exofacial thiols using Flow cytometry. RESULTS: CSE augmented the release of the EV subtype exosomes, which could be prevented by scavenging thiol-reactive components using NAC or GSH. Among thiol-reactive CSE components, H2O2 had no effect on exosome release, whereas acrolein imitated the NAC-reversible exosome induction. The exosome induction by CSE and acrolein was paralleled by depletion of cell surface thiols. Membrane impermeable thiol blocking agents, but not specific inhibitors of the exofacially located thiol-dependent enzyme PDI, stimulated exosome release. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION: Thiol-reactive compounds like acrolein account for CSE-induced exosome release by reacting with cell surface thiols. As acrolein is produced endogenously during inflammation, it may influence exosome release not only in smokers, but also in ex-smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. NAC and GSH prevent acrolein- and CSE-induced exosome release, which may contribute to the clinical benefits of NAC treatment. (hide)
EV-METRIC
44% (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Cell culture supernatant
Sample origin
Exposed to cigarette smoke extract
Focus vesicles
extracellular vesicle / 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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(d)(U)C
Filtration
Adj. k-factor
133.2 (pelleting)
Protein markers
EV: CD63
non-EV: grp94
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Biogenesis/cargo sorting
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
BEAS2B
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted serum
Preparation of EDS
>=18h at >= 100,000g
Cell viability (%)
NA
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 performed
Yes
Pelleting: time(min)
150
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 70 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
117734
Pelleting: adjusted k-factor
133.2
Filtration steps
0.22µm or 0.2µm
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Bradford
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63
Not detected contaminants
grp94
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
TRPS
Report type
Size range/distribution
Reported size (nm)
60-300
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Cryo-EM
Image type
Close-up
Report size (nm)
50-160
EV160009 2/2 Homo sapiens BEAS2B (d)(U)C
Filtration
Benedikter BJ 2016 44%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Benedikter BJ, Volgers C, van Eijck PH, Wouters EFM, Savelkoul PHM, Reynaert NL, Haenen GRMM, Rohde GGU, Weseler AR, Stassen FRM
Journal
J Cell Sci
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Airway epithelial cells have been described to release extracellular vesicles (EVs) wi (show more...)INTRODUCTION: Airway epithelial cells have been described to release extracellular vesicles (EVs) with pathological properties when exposed to cigarette smoke extract (CSE). As CSE causes oxidative stress, we investigated whether its oxidative components are responsible for inducing EV release and whether this could be prevented using the thiol antioxidants N-acetyl-l-cysteine (NAC) or glutathione (GSH). METHODS: BEAS-2B cells were exposed for 24h to CSE, H2O2, acrolein, 5,5'-dithiobis-(2-nitrobenzoic acid) (DTNB), bacitracin, rutin or the anti-protein disulfide isomerase (PDI) antibody clone RL90; with or without NAC or GSH. EVs in media were measured using CD63+CD81+ bead-coupled flow cytometry or tunable resistive pulse sensing (TRPS). For characterization by Western Blotting, cryo-transmission electron microscopy and TRPS, EVs were isolated using ultracentrifugation. Glutathione disulfide and GSH in cells were assessed by a GSH reductase cycling assay, and exofacial thiols using Flow cytometry. RESULTS: CSE augmented the release of the EV subtype exosomes, which could be prevented by scavenging thiol-reactive components using NAC or GSH. Among thiol-reactive CSE components, H2O2 had no effect on exosome release, whereas acrolein imitated the NAC-reversible exosome induction. The exosome induction by CSE and acrolein was paralleled by depletion of cell surface thiols. Membrane impermeable thiol blocking agents, but not specific inhibitors of the exofacially located thiol-dependent enzyme PDI, stimulated exosome release. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION: Thiol-reactive compounds like acrolein account for CSE-induced exosome release by reacting with cell surface thiols. As acrolein is produced endogenously during inflammation, it may influence exosome release not only in smokers, but also in ex-smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. NAC and GSH prevent acrolein- and CSE-induced exosome release, which may contribute to the clinical benefits of NAC treatment. (hide)
EV-METRIC
44% (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Cell culture supernatant
Sample origin
Control condition
Focus vesicles
extracellular vesicle / 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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(d)(U)C
Filtration
Adj. k-factor
133.2 (pelleting)
Protein markers
EV: CD63
non-EV: grp94
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Biogenesis/cargo sorting
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
BEAS2B
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted serum
Preparation of EDS
>=18h at >= 100,000g
Cell viability (%)
NA
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 performed
Yes
Pelleting: time(min)
150
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 70 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
117734
Pelleting: adjusted k-factor
133.2
Filtration steps
0.22µm or 0.2µm
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Bradford
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63
Not detected contaminants
grp94
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
TRPS
Report type
Size range/distribution
Reported size (nm)
60-300
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Cryo-EM
Image type
Close-up
Report size (nm)
50-160
EV160008 2/3 Homo sapiens Primary human pancreatic islets, primary rat pancreatic islets, INS1 cell line (d)(U)C Cianciaruso C 2016 44%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Cianciaruso C, Phelps EA, Pasquier M, Hamelin R, Demurtas D, Alibashe Ahmed M, Piemonti L, Hirosue S, Swartz MA, De Palma M, Hubbell JA, Baekkeskov S
Journal
Diabetes
Abstract
The target autoantigens in several organ-specific autoimmune diseases, including type 1 diabetes (T1 (show more...)The target autoantigens in several organ-specific autoimmune diseases, including type 1 diabetes (T1D), are intracellular membrane proteins, whose initial encounter with the immune system is poorly understood. Here we propose a new model for how these proteins can initiate autoimmunity. We found that rat and human pancreatic islets release the intracellular β-cell autoantigens in human T1D, GAD65, IA-2, and proinsulin in exosomes, which are taken up by and activate dendritic cells. Accordingly, the anchoring of GAD65 to exosome-mimetic liposomes strongly boosted antigen presentation and T-cell activation in the context of the human T1D susceptibility haplotype HLA-DR4. Cytokine-induced endoplasmic reticulum stress enhanced exosome secretion by β-cells; induced exosomal release of the immunostimulatory chaperones calreticulin, Gp96, and ORP150; and increased exosomal stimulation of antigen-presenting cells. We propose that stress-induced exosomal release of intracellular autoantigens and immunostimulatory chaperones may play a role in the initiation of autoimmune responses in T1D. (hide)
EV-METRIC
44% (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Cell culture supernatant
Sample origin
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(d)(U)C
Protein markers
EV: Insulin/ GAD65/ Flotillin-1/ CD9/ IA-2
non-EV: None
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Function, Biogenesis/cargo sorting, Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
Primary human pancreatic islets, primary rat pancreatic islets, INS1 cell line
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted serum
Preparation of EDS
overnight (16h) at >=100,000g
Cell viability (%)
NA
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: time(min)
70
Pelleting: speed (g)
110000
Wash: time (min)
70
Wash: speed (g)
110000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
BCA
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9, Flotillin-1, GAD65, IA-2
ELISA
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Proteomics database
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mode
Reported size (nm)
143
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Wide-field
Report size (nm)
120
EV220045 4/4 Homo sapiens Blood plasma IAF Zhao Z 2016 43%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Zhao Z, Yang Y, Zeng Y, He M
Journal
Lab Chip
Abstract
Tumor-derived circulating exosomes, enriched with a group of tumor antigens, have been recognized as (show more...)Tumor-derived circulating exosomes, enriched with a group of tumor antigens, have been recognized as a promising biomarker source for cancer diagnosis via a less invasive procedure. Quantitatively pinpointing exosome tumor markers is appealing, yet challenging. In this study, we developed a simple microfluidic approach (ExoSearch) which provides enriched preparation of blood plasma exosomes for in situ, multiplexed detection using immunomagnetic beads. The ExoSearch chip offers a robust, continuous-flow design for quantitative isolation and release of blood plasma exosomes in a wide range of preparation volumes (10 μL to 10 mL). We employed the ExoSearch chip for blood-based diagnosis of ovarian cancer by multiplexed measurement of three exosomal tumor markers (CA-125, EpCAM, CD24) using a training set of ovarian cancer patient plasma, which showed significant diagnostic power (a.u.c. = 1.0, p = 0.001) and was comparable with the standard Bradford assay. This work provides an essentially needed platform for utilization of exosomes in clinical cancer diagnosis, as well as fundamental exosome research. (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Blood plasma
Sample origin
Ovarian cancer
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
Immunoaffinity capture (non-commercial)
Protein markers
EV: CD24/ EpCAM/ CA-125
non-EV: None
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
New methodological development
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Blood plasma
Separation Method
Immunoaffinity capture
Selected surface protein(s)
CD24/ CA-125/ EpCAM
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Bradford
Fluorescent NTA
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD24/ EpCAM/ CA-125
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Not Reported
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Immuno-EM
EM protein
Other/ EpCAm/ CD9/ CD81/ CD63/ CA-125
Image type
Close-up
EV concentration
Yes
EV220145 1/2 Homo sapiens MCF7 (d)(U)C
Total Exosome Isolation
Wei Y 2016 38%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Wei Y, Li M, Cui S, Wang D, Zhang CY, Zen K, Li L
Journal
Molecules
Abstract
Shikonin is a naphthoquinone isolated from the traditional Chinese medicine Lithospermum. It has bee (show more...)Shikonin is a naphthoquinone isolated from the traditional Chinese medicine Lithospermum. It has been used in the treatment of various tumors. However, the effects of shikonin on such diseases have not been fully elucidated. In the present study, we detected the exosome release of a breast cancer cell line (MCF-7) with shikonin treatment and found a positive relationship between the level of secreted exosomes and cell proliferation. We next analyzed miRNA profiles in MCF-7 cells and exosomes and found that some miRNAs are specifically sorted and abundant in exosomes. Knockdown of the most abundant miRNAs in exosomes and the MCF-7 proliferation assay showed that miR-128 in exosomes negatively regulates the level of Bax in MCF-7 recipient cells and inhibits cell proliferation. These results show that shikonin inhibits the proliferation of MCF-7 cells through reducing tumor-derived exosomal miR-128. The current study suggests that shikonin suppresses MCF-7 growth by the inhibition of exosome release. (hide)
EV-METRIC
38% (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Cell culture supernatant
Sample origin
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Commercial method
Protein markers
EV: CD63/ TSG101/ CD9/ GAPDH
non-EV: None
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
MCF7
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Pelleting performed
No
Commercial kit
Total Exosome Isolation
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
No
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ TSG101/ CD9
Not detected EV-associated proteins
GAPDH
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)­(q)PCR
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Size range/distribution
Reported size (nm)
0-400
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission­-EM
Image type
Close-up
Report size (nm)
50-100
EV220096 1/3 Homo sapiens Serum ExoQuick Li Z 2016 38%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Li Z, Ma YY, Wang J, Zeng XF, Li R, Kang W, Hao XK
Journal
Onco Targets Ther
Abstract
Novel biomarkers for the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa) are urgently required. Increasing eviden (show more...)Novel biomarkers for the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa) are urgently required. Increasing evidence suggests that exosomal microRNAs (miRNAs or miRs) in serum may be potential noninvasive biomarkers for certain diseases. The objective of the present study was to investigate and assess whether exosomal miR-141 is an effective biomarker for human PCa. (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Serum
Sample origin
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
Commercial method
Protein markers
EV: CD63/ HSP70/ beta-actin
non-EV: None
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Serum
Separation Method
Commercial kit
ExoQuick
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
BCA
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
No
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ HSP70/ beta-actin
Flow cytometry specific beads
Antibody details provided?
No
Antibody dilution provided?
No
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)(q)PCR
Database
No
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
30-100 nm
EV210099 2/9 Homo sapiens HEK293 T DC Rider, Mark A 2016 38%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Mark A Rider, Stephanie N Hurwitz, David G Meckes Jr
Journal
Sci Rep
Abstract
Initially thought to be a means for cells to eliminate waste, secreted extracellular vesicles, known (show more...)Initially thought to be a means for cells to eliminate waste, secreted extracellular vesicles, known as exosomes, are now understood to mediate numerous healthy and pathological processes. Though abundant in biological fluids, purifying exosomes has been challenging because their biophysical properties overlap with other secreted cell products. Easy-to-use commercial kits for harvesting exosomes are now widely used, but the relative low-purity and high-cost of the preparations restricts their utility. Here we describe a method for purifying exosomes and other extracellular vesicles by adapting methods for isolating viruses using polyethylene glycol. This technique, called ExtraPEG, enriches exosomes from large volumes of media rapidly and inexpensively using low-speed centrifugation, followed by a single small-volume ultracentrifugation purification step. Total protein and RNA harvested from vesicles is sufficient in quantity and quality for proteomics and sequencing analyses, demonstrating the utility of this method for biomarker discovery and diagnostics. Additionally, confocal microscopy studies suggest that the biological activity of vesicles is not impaired. The ExtraPEG method can be easily adapted to enrich for different vesicle populations, or as an efficient precursor to subsequent purification techniques, providing a means to harvest exosomes from many different biological fluids and for a wide variety of purposes. (hide)
EV-METRIC
38% (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Cell culture supernatant
Sample origin
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
DC
Protein markers
EV: CD63/ TSG101/ HSP70/ Alix
non-EV: None
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
New methodological development/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-­related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
HEK293 T
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
>=18h at >= 100,000g
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 performed
No
Density cushion
Density medium
Sucrose
Sample volume
4
Cushion volume
35
Density of the cushion
30%
Centrifugation time
75
Centrifugation speed
100000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Fluorometric assay (e.g. Qubit, NanoOrange,...)
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
No
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ TSG101/ HSP70/ Alix
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Not Reported
Particle yield
NA NA
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up
Report size (nm)
Not specified
EV210099 5/9 Homo sapiens HEK293 T NA Rider, Mark A 2016 38%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Mark A Rider, Stephanie N Hurwitz, David G Meckes Jr
Journal
Sci Rep
Abstract
Initially thought to be a means for cells to eliminate waste, secreted extracellular vesicles, known (show more...)Initially thought to be a means for cells to eliminate waste, secreted extracellular vesicles, known as exosomes, are now understood to mediate numerous healthy and pathological processes. Though abundant in biological fluids, purifying exosomes has been challenging because their biophysical properties overlap with other secreted cell products. Easy-to-use commercial kits for harvesting exosomes are now widely used, but the relative low-purity and high-cost of the preparations restricts their utility. Here we describe a method for purifying exosomes and other extracellular vesicles by adapting methods for isolating viruses using polyethylene glycol. This technique, called ExtraPEG, enriches exosomes from large volumes of media rapidly and inexpensively using low-speed centrifugation, followed by a single small-volume ultracentrifugation purification step. Total protein and RNA harvested from vesicles is sufficient in quantity and quality for proteomics and sequencing analyses, demonstrating the utility of this method for biomarker discovery and diagnostics. Additionally, confocal microscopy studies suggest that the biological activity of vesicles is not impaired. The ExtraPEG method can be easily adapted to enrich for different vesicle populations, or as an efficient precursor to subsequent purification techniques, providing a means to harvest exosomes from many different biological fluids and for a wide variety of purposes. (hide)
EV-METRIC
38% (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Cell culture supernatant
Sample origin
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
NA
Protein markers
EV: CD63/ TSG101/ HSP70/ Alix
non-EV: None
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
New methodological development/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-­related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
HEK293 T
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
>=18h at >= 100,000g
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Pelleting performed
No
Other
Name other separation method
NA
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Fluorometric assay (e.g. Qubit, NanoOrange,...)
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
No
Detected EV-associated proteins
Alix/ TSG101/ HSC70/ CD63
Proteomics database
No
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
Capillary electrophoresis (e.g. Bioanalyzer)
Database
No
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Not Reported
Particle yield
NA NA
EM
EV210096 2/6 Homo sapiens Urine (d)(U)C
Filtration
Royo, Felix 2016 38%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Felix Royo, Patricia Zuñiga-Garcia, Pilar Sanchez-Mosquera, Ainara Egia, Amparo Perez, Ana Loizaga, Raquel Arceo, Isabel Lacasa, Ainara Rabade, Edurne Arrieta, Roberto Bilbao, Miguel Unda, Arkaitz Carracedo, Juan M Falcon-Perez
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Urine sample analysis is irreplaceable as a non-invasive method for disease diagnosis and follow-up. (show more...)Urine sample analysis is irreplaceable as a non-invasive method for disease diagnosis and follow-up. However, in urine samples, non-degraded protein and RNA may be only found in urinary extracellular vesicles (uEVs). In recent years, various methods of uEV enrichment using low volumes of urine and unsophisticated equipment have been developed, with variable success. We compared the results of the differential ultracentrifugation procedure with 4 of these methods. The methods tested were a lectin-based purification, Exoquick (System Biosciences), Total Exosome Isolation from Invitrogen and an in-house modified procedure employing the Exosomal RNA Kit from Norgen Biotek Corp. The analysis of selected gene transcripts and protein markers of extracellular vesicles (EVs) revealed that each method isolates a different mixture of uEV protein markers. In our conditions, the extraction with Norgen's reagent achieved the best performance in terms of gene transcript and protein detection and reproducibility. By using this method, we were able to detect alterations of EVs protein markers in urine samples from prostate cancer adenoma patients. Taken together, our results show that the isolation of uEVs is feasible from small volumes of urine and avoiding ultracentrifugation, making easier the analysis in a clinical facility. However, caution should be taken in the selection of the enrichment method since they have a differential affinity for protein uEVs markers and by extension for different subpopulation of EVs. (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Urine
Sample origin
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(d)(U)C
Filtration
Protein markers
EV: TSG101/ CD63/ Flotillin1/ CD9/ CD26/ CD10/ AQP2/ AIP
non-EV: Tamm-Horsfall protein
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Urine
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: time(min)
90
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 70 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Filtration steps
0.22µm or 0.2µm
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
No
Detected EV-associated proteins
Flotillin1/ CD9/ CD63/ CD26/ CD10/ AQP2/ AIP/ TSG101
Detected contaminants
Tamm-Horsfall protein
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)(q)PCR;Capillary electrophoresis (e.g. Bioanalyzer)
Database
No
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
EM
EM-type
Cryo-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV210096 5/6 Homo sapiens Urine (d)(U)C
Filtration
Total Exosome Isolation
Royo, Felix 2016 38%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Felix Royo, Patricia Zuñiga-Garcia, Pilar Sanchez-Mosquera, Ainara Egia, Amparo Perez, Ana Loizaga, Raquel Arceo, Isabel Lacasa, Ainara Rabade, Edurne Arrieta, Roberto Bilbao, Miguel Unda, Arkaitz Carracedo, Juan M Falcon-Perez
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Urine sample analysis is irreplaceable as a non-invasive method for disease diagnosis and follow-up. (show more...)Urine sample analysis is irreplaceable as a non-invasive method for disease diagnosis and follow-up. However, in urine samples, non-degraded protein and RNA may be only found in urinary extracellular vesicles (uEVs). In recent years, various methods of uEV enrichment using low volumes of urine and unsophisticated equipment have been developed, with variable success. We compared the results of the differential ultracentrifugation procedure with 4 of these methods. The methods tested were a lectin-based purification, Exoquick (System Biosciences), Total Exosome Isolation from Invitrogen and an in-house modified procedure employing the Exosomal RNA Kit from Norgen Biotek Corp. The analysis of selected gene transcripts and protein markers of extracellular vesicles (EVs) revealed that each method isolates a different mixture of uEV protein markers. In our conditions, the extraction with Norgen's reagent achieved the best performance in terms of gene transcript and protein detection and reproducibility. By using this method, we were able to detect alterations of EVs protein markers in urine samples from prostate cancer adenoma patients. Taken together, our results show that the isolation of uEVs is feasible from small volumes of urine and avoiding ultracentrifugation, making easier the analysis in a clinical facility. However, caution should be taken in the selection of the enrichment method since they have a differential affinity for protein uEVs markers and by extension for different subpopulation of EVs. (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Urine
Sample origin
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(d)(U)C
Filtration
Commercial method
Protein markers
EV: TSG101/ CD63/ Flotillin1/ CD9/ CD26/ CD10/ AQP2/ AIP
non-EV: Tamm-Horsfall protein
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Urine
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Pelleting performed
No
Filtration steps
0.22µm or 0.2µm
Commercial kit
Total Exosome Isolation
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
No
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD26/ CD10/ AQP2/ AIP/ CD9/ CD63/ TSG101
Not detected EV-associated proteins
Flotillin1
Detected contaminants
Tamm-Horsfall protein
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)(q)PCR;Capillary electrophoresis (e.g. Bioanalyzer)
Database
No
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
EM
EM-type
Cryo-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV210096 6/6 Homo sapiens Urine (d)(U)C
Filtration
Extraction with biotinylated Solanum tuberosum (potato) lectin (STL) and streptavidin coated Dynabeads
Royo, Felix 2016 38%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Felix Royo, Patricia Zuñiga-Garcia, Pilar Sanchez-Mosquera, Ainara Egia, Amparo Perez, Ana Loizaga, Raquel Arceo, Isabel Lacasa, Ainara Rabade, Edurne Arrieta, Roberto Bilbao, Miguel Unda, Arkaitz Carracedo, Juan M Falcon-Perez
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Urine sample analysis is irreplaceable as a non-invasive method for disease diagnosis and follow-up. (show more...)Urine sample analysis is irreplaceable as a non-invasive method for disease diagnosis and follow-up. However, in urine samples, non-degraded protein and RNA may be only found in urinary extracellular vesicles (uEVs). In recent years, various methods of uEV enrichment using low volumes of urine and unsophisticated equipment have been developed, with variable success. We compared the results of the differential ultracentrifugation procedure with 4 of these methods. The methods tested were a lectin-based purification, Exoquick (System Biosciences), Total Exosome Isolation from Invitrogen and an in-house modified procedure employing the Exosomal RNA Kit from Norgen Biotek Corp. The analysis of selected gene transcripts and protein markers of extracellular vesicles (EVs) revealed that each method isolates a different mixture of uEV protein markers. In our conditions, the extraction with Norgen's reagent achieved the best performance in terms of gene transcript and protein detection and reproducibility. By using this method, we were able to detect alterations of EVs protein markers in urine samples from prostate cancer adenoma patients. Taken together, our results show that the isolation of uEVs is feasible from small volumes of urine and avoiding ultracentrifugation, making easier the analysis in a clinical facility. However, caution should be taken in the selection of the enrichment method since they have a differential affinity for protein uEVs markers and by extension for different subpopulation of EVs. (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Urine
Sample origin
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(d)(U)C
Filtration
Extraction with biotinylated Solanum tuberosum (potato) lectin (STL) and streptavidin coated Dynabeads
Protein markers
EV: TSG101/ CD63/ AIP/ CD26/ CD10/ AQP2/ Flotillin1/ CD9
non-EV: Tamm-Horsfall protein
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Urine
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Pelleting performed
No
Filtration steps
0.22µm or 0.2µm
Other
Name other separation method
Extraction with biotinylated Solanum tuberosum (potato) lectin (STL) and streptavidin coated Dynabeads
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
No
Detected EV-associated proteins
Flotillin1/ CD26/ CD10/ AQP2/ TSG101/ CD9/ CD63
Not detected EV-associated proteins
AIP
Detected contaminants
Tamm-Horsfall protein
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)(q)PCR;Capillary electrophoresis (e.g. Bioanalyzer)
Database
No
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
EM
EM-type
Cryo-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV210078 1/5 Homo sapiens KHOS (d)(U)C
Filtration
ExoQuick
Macklin, Rebecca 2016 38%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Rebecca Macklin, Haolu Wang, Dorothy Loo, Sally Martin, Andrew Cumming, Na Cai, Rebecca Lane, Natalia Saenz Ponce, Eleni Topkas, Kerry Inder, Nicholas A Saunders, Liliana Endo-Munoz
Journal
Oncotarget
Abstract
Osteosarcoma (OS) is the most common pediatric bone tumor and is associated with the emergence of pu (show more...)Osteosarcoma (OS) is the most common pediatric bone tumor and is associated with the emergence of pulmonary metastasis. Unfortunately, the mechanistic basis for metastasis remains unclear. Tumor-derived extracellular vesicles (EVs) have been shown to play critical roles in cell-to-cell communication and metastatic progression in other cancers, but their role in OS has not been explored. We show that EVs secreted by cells derived from a highly metastatic clonal variant of the KHOS cell line can be internalized by a poorly metastatic clonal variant of the same cell line and induce a migratory and invasive phenotype. This horizontal phenotypic transfer is unidirectional and provides evidence that metastatic potential may arise via interclonal co-operation. Proteomic analysis of the EVs secreted by highly metastatic OS clonal variants results in the identification of a number of proteins and G-protein coupled receptor signaling events as potential drivers of OS metastasis and novel therapeutic targets. Finally, multiphoton microscopy with fluorescence lifetime imaging in vivo, demonstrated a preferential seeding of lung tissue by EVs derived from highly metastatic OS clonal variants. Thus, we show that EVs derived from highly metastatic clonal variants of OS may drive metastatic behaviour via interclonal co-operation and preferential colonization of the lungs. (hide)
EV-METRIC
38% (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Cell culture supernatant
Sample origin
HiMet-C6
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(d)(U)C
Filtration
Commercial method
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ HSP70/ CD63
non-EV: None
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Function/Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
KHOS
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
Overnight (16h) at >=100,000g + 0.2 µm filtration
Cell count
Not specified
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Pelleting performed
No
Filtration steps
0.22µm or 0.2µm
Commercial kit
ExoQuick
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Bradford
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
No
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ HSP70
Not detected EV-associated proteins
CD81
Proteomics database
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
DLS
Report type
Modus
Reported size (nm)
85
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up
EV200152 1/2 Homo sapiens Serum (d)(U)C
ExoQuick
da Silva Nardi, Fabiola 2016 38%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Fabiola da Silva Nardi, Tatiana Ferreira Michelon, Jorge Neumann, Luis Felipe Santos Manvailer, Bettina Wagner, Peter A Horn, Maria da Graça Bicalho, Vera Rebmann
Journal
Immunobiology
Abstract
Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are widely considered important modulators of cell-cell communication a (show more...)Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are widely considered important modulators of cell-cell communication and may interact with target cells locally and on a systemic level. Several studies had shown that circulating EVs' levels are increased during pregnancy. However, EVs characteristics, composition and biological functions in pregnancy still need to be clarified. This study aims to determine if circulating EVs during pregnancy are modified regarding levels, markers and cytokine profile as well as their reactivity towards peripheral blood cells. 26 pregnant women (PW) being in the second gestational trimester and 59 non-pregnant women (NPW) were investigated. EVs enrichment was performed by ExoQuick™ or ultracentrifugation; nanoparticle tracking analysis, SDS-PAGE followed by Western Blotting and densitometry, and IFN-γ, IL-10 and TGF-β1 ELISA for EVs characterization; imaging flow cytometry to analyze EVs' uptake by peripheral blood cells and flow cytometry were performed to analyze EVs function regarding induction of caspase-3 activity. Circulating EVs' levels were increased during pregnancy [26.9×10(6)EVs/ml (range: 6.4-46.3); p=0.003] vs NPW [18.9×10(6)EVs/ml (range: 2.5-61.3)]. Importantly, the immunosuppressive TGF-β1 and IL-10 cytokine cargo were increased in EVs of PW even after normalization to 1 million EVs [TGF-β1: 0.25pg/10(6)EVs (range: 0.0-2.0); p<0.0001] and [IL-10: 0.21pg/10(6)EVs (range: 0.0-16.8); p=0.006] vs NPW. Although EVs derived from non-pregnant and pregnant women were taken up by NK cells, the latter exclusively enhanced the caspase-3 activity in CD56(dim) NK cells (8.2±0.9; p=0.02). The qualitative and quantitative pregnancy-related alterations of circulating EVs provide first hints for an immune modulating role of circulating EVs during pregnancy. (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Serum
Sample origin
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Commercial method
Protein markers
EV: CD9/ CD63/ ICAM-1/ TSG101/ HSP70/ CD81/ IFN-gamma/ IL-10/ TGF-beta 1
non-EV: CYC1
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function/Mechanism of uptake/transfer
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Serum
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Pelleting performed
No
Commercial kit
ExoQuick
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD63/ ICAM-1/ TSG101/ HSP70/ CD81
Not detected contaminants
CYC1
ELISA
Antibody details provided?
No
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
IFN-gamma/ IL-10/ TGF-beta 1
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Size range/distribution
Reported size (nm)
145 +/- 9.9nm
EV concentration
Yes
EV200152 2/2 Homo sapiens Serum (d)(U)C
ExoQuick
da Silva Nardi, Fabiola 2016 38%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Fabiola da Silva Nardi, Tatiana Ferreira Michelon, Jorge Neumann, Luis Felipe Santos Manvailer, Bettina Wagner, Peter A Horn, Maria da Graça Bicalho, Vera Rebmann
Journal
Immunobiology
Abstract
Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are widely considered important modulators of cell-cell communication a (show more...)Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are widely considered important modulators of cell-cell communication and may interact with target cells locally and on a systemic level. Several studies had shown that circulating EVs' levels are increased during pregnancy. However, EVs characteristics, composition and biological functions in pregnancy still need to be clarified. This study aims to determine if circulating EVs during pregnancy are modified regarding levels, markers and cytokine profile as well as their reactivity towards peripheral blood cells. 26 pregnant women (PW) being in the second gestational trimester and 59 non-pregnant women (NPW) were investigated. EVs enrichment was performed by ExoQuick™ or ultracentrifugation; nanoparticle tracking analysis, SDS-PAGE followed by Western Blotting and densitometry, and IFN-γ, IL-10 and TGF-β1 ELISA for EVs characterization; imaging flow cytometry to analyze EVs' uptake by peripheral blood cells and flow cytometry were performed to analyze EVs function regarding induction of caspase-3 activity. Circulating EVs' levels were increased during pregnancy [26.9×10(6)EVs/ml (range: 6.4-46.3); p=0.003] vs NPW [18.9×10(6)EVs/ml (range: 2.5-61.3)]. Importantly, the immunosuppressive TGF-β1 and IL-10 cytokine cargo were increased in EVs of PW even after normalization to 1 million EVs [TGF-β1: 0.25pg/10(6)EVs (range: 0.0-2.0); p<0.0001] and [IL-10: 0.21pg/10(6)EVs (range: 0.0-16.8); p=0.006] vs NPW. Although EVs derived from non-pregnant and pregnant women were taken up by NK cells, the latter exclusively enhanced the caspase-3 activity in CD56(dim) NK cells (8.2±0.9; p=0.02). The qualitative and quantitative pregnancy-related alterations of circulating EVs provide first hints for an immune modulating role of circulating EVs during pregnancy. (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Serum
Sample origin
Healthy pregnant
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Commercial method
Protein markers
EV: CD9/ CD63/ ICAM-1/ TSG101/ HSP70/ CD81/ IFN-gamma/ IL-10/ TGF-beta 1
non-EV: CYC1
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function/Mechanism of uptake/transfer
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Serum
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Pelleting performed
No
Commercial kit
ExoQuick
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD63/ ICAM-1/ TSG101/ HSP70/ CD81
Not detected contaminants
CYC1
ELISA
Antibody details provided?
No
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
IFN-gamma/ IL-10/ TGF-beta 1
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Size range/distribution
Reported size (nm)
145 +/- 9.9nm
EV concentration
Yes
EV160017 1/8 Homo sapiens Cal-27 Oral squamous cell carcinoma ExoQuick Li L 2016 37%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Li L, Li C, Wang S, Wang Z, Jiang J, Wang W, Li X, Chen J, Liu K, Li C, Zhu G.
Journal
Cancer Res
Abstract
Hypoxia is a common feature of solid tumors and is associated with aggressiveness and poor patient o (show more...)Hypoxia is a common feature of solid tumors and is associated with aggressiveness and poor patient outcomes. Exosomes, initially considered to be cellular "garbage dumpsters," are now implicated in mediating interactions with the cellular environment. However, the mechanisms underlying the association between exosomes and hypoxia during cancer progression remain poorly understood. In this study, we found that exosomes derived from hypoxic oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) cells increased the migration and invasion of OSCC cells in a HIF-1α and HIF-2α-dependent manner. Given that exosomes have been shown to transport miRNAs to alter cellular functions, we performed miRNA sequencing of normoxic and hypoxic OSCC-derived exosomes. Of the 108 miRNAs that were differentially expressed, miR-21 stood out as one of the most significantly upregulated miRNAs under hypoxic conditions. miR-21 depletion in hypoxic OSCC cells led to decreased miR-21 levels in exosomes and significantly reduced cell migration and invasion. Conversely, restoration of miR-21 expression in HIF-1α and HIF-2α-depleted exosomes rescued OSCC cell migration and invasion. Moreover, exosomal miR-21 markedly enhanced snail and vimentin expression, while significantly decreasing E-cadherin levels in OSCC cells, in vitro and in vivo Finally, circulating exosomal miR-21 levels were closely associated with HIF-1α/HIF-2α expression, T stage, and lymph node metastasis in patients with OSCC. In conclusion, our findings suggest that the hypoxic microenvironment may stimulate tumor cells to generate miR-21-rich exosomes that are delivered to normoxic cells to promote prometastatic behaviors and prompt further investigation into the therapeutic value of exosome inhibition for cancer treatment. (hide)
EV-METRIC
37% (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Cell culture supernatant
Sample origin
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
ExoQuick
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ CD63
non-EV: Tubulin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function/Biomarker
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
Cal-27 Oral squamous cell carcinoma
EV-harvesting Medium
Not specified
Separation Method
Commercial kit
ExoQuick
Other
Name other separation method
ExoQuick
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
BCA
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
No
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ CD81
Not detected contaminants
Tubulin
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)(q)PCR;RNA sequencing
Database
Yes
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
EM
EM-type
Scanning-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
50-200
EV160017 2/8 Homo sapiens Cal-27 Oral squamous cell carcinoma ExoQuick Li L 2016 37%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Li L, Li C, Wang S, Wang Z, Jiang J, Wang W, Li X, Chen J, Liu K, Li C, Zhu G.
Journal
Cancer Res
Abstract
Hypoxia is a common feature of solid tumors and is associated with aggressiveness and poor patient o (show more...)Hypoxia is a common feature of solid tumors and is associated with aggressiveness and poor patient outcomes. Exosomes, initially considered to be cellular "garbage dumpsters," are now implicated in mediating interactions with the cellular environment. However, the mechanisms underlying the association between exosomes and hypoxia during cancer progression remain poorly understood. In this study, we found that exosomes derived from hypoxic oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) cells increased the migration and invasion of OSCC cells in a HIF-1α and HIF-2α-dependent manner. Given that exosomes have been shown to transport miRNAs to alter cellular functions, we performed miRNA sequencing of normoxic and hypoxic OSCC-derived exosomes. Of the 108 miRNAs that were differentially expressed, miR-21 stood out as one of the most significantly upregulated miRNAs under hypoxic conditions. miR-21 depletion in hypoxic OSCC cells led to decreased miR-21 levels in exosomes and significantly reduced cell migration and invasion. Conversely, restoration of miR-21 expression in HIF-1α and HIF-2α-depleted exosomes rescued OSCC cell migration and invasion. Moreover, exosomal miR-21 markedly enhanced snail and vimentin expression, while significantly decreasing E-cadherin levels in OSCC cells, in vitro and in vivo Finally, circulating exosomal miR-21 levels were closely associated with HIF-1α/HIF-2α expression, T stage, and lymph node metastasis in patients with OSCC. In conclusion, our findings suggest that the hypoxic microenvironment may stimulate tumor cells to generate miR-21-rich exosomes that are delivered to normoxic cells to promote prometastatic behaviors and prompt further investigation into the therapeutic value of exosome inhibition for cancer treatment. (hide)
EV-METRIC
37% (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Cell culture supernatant
Sample origin
Hypoxic condition (1% O2)
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
ExoQuick
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ CD63
non-EV: Tubulin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function/Biomarker
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
Cal-27 Oral squamous cell carcinoma
EV-harvesting Medium
Not specified
Separation Method
Commercial kit
ExoQuick
Other
Name other separation method
ExoQuick
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
BCA
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
No
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ CD81
Not detected contaminants
Tubulin
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)(q)PCR;RNAsequencing
Database
Yes
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
EM
EM-type
Scanning-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
50-200
EV160017 4/8 Homo sapiens SCC-9 Oral squamous cell carcinoma ExoQuick Li L 2016 37%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Li L, Li C, Wang S, Wang Z, Jiang J, Wang W, Li X, Chen J, Liu K, Li C, Zhu G.
Journal
Cancer Res
Abstract
Hypoxia is a common feature of solid tumors and is associated with aggressiveness and poor patient o (show more...)Hypoxia is a common feature of solid tumors and is associated with aggressiveness and poor patient outcomes. Exosomes, initially considered to be cellular "garbage dumpsters," are now implicated in mediating interactions with the cellular environment. However, the mechanisms underlying the association between exosomes and hypoxia during cancer progression remain poorly understood. In this study, we found that exosomes derived from hypoxic oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) cells increased the migration and invasion of OSCC cells in a HIF-1α and HIF-2α-dependent manner. Given that exosomes have been shown to transport miRNAs to alter cellular functions, we performed miRNA sequencing of normoxic and hypoxic OSCC-derived exosomes. Of the 108 miRNAs that were differentially expressed, miR-21 stood out as one of the most significantly upregulated miRNAs under hypoxic conditions. miR-21 depletion in hypoxic OSCC cells led to decreased miR-21 levels in exosomes and significantly reduced cell migration and invasion. Conversely, restoration of miR-21 expression in HIF-1α and HIF-2α-depleted exosomes rescued OSCC cell migration and invasion. Moreover, exosomal miR-21 markedly enhanced snail and vimentin expression, while significantly decreasing E-cadherin levels in OSCC cells, in vitro and in vivo Finally, circulating exosomal miR-21 levels were closely associated with HIF-1α/HIF-2α expression, T stage, and lymph node metastasis in patients with OSCC. In conclusion, our findings suggest that the hypoxic microenvironment may stimulate tumor cells to generate miR-21-rich exosomes that are delivered to normoxic cells to promote prometastatic behaviors and prompt further investigation into the therapeutic value of exosome inhibition for cancer treatment. (hide)
EV-METRIC
37% (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Cell culture supernatant
Sample origin
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
ExoQuick
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ CD63
non-EV: Tubulin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function/Biomarker
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
SCC-9 Oral squamous cell carcinoma
EV-harvesting Medium
Not specified
Separation Method
Commercial kit
ExoQuick
Other
Name other separation method
ExoQuick
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
BCA
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
No
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ CD81
Not detected contaminants
Tubulin
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)(q)PCR
Database
No
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
EM
EM-type
Scanning-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
50-200
EV160017 5/8 Homo sapiens SCC-9 Oral squamous cell carcinoma ExoQuick Li L 2016 37%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Li L, Li C, Wang S, Wang Z, Jiang J, Wang W, Li X, Chen J, Liu K, Li C, Zhu G.
Journal
Cancer Res
Abstract
Hypoxia is a common feature of solid tumors and is associated with aggressiveness and poor patient o (show more...)Hypoxia is a common feature of solid tumors and is associated with aggressiveness and poor patient outcomes. Exosomes, initially considered to be cellular "garbage dumpsters," are now implicated in mediating interactions with the cellular environment. However, the mechanisms underlying the association between exosomes and hypoxia during cancer progression remain poorly understood. In this study, we found that exosomes derived from hypoxic oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) cells increased the migration and invasion of OSCC cells in a HIF-1α and HIF-2α-dependent manner. Given that exosomes have been shown to transport miRNAs to alter cellular functions, we performed miRNA sequencing of normoxic and hypoxic OSCC-derived exosomes. Of the 108 miRNAs that were differentially expressed, miR-21 stood out as one of the most significantly upregulated miRNAs under hypoxic conditions. miR-21 depletion in hypoxic OSCC cells led to decreased miR-21 levels in exosomes and significantly reduced cell migration and invasion. Conversely, restoration of miR-21 expression in HIF-1α and HIF-2α-depleted exosomes rescued OSCC cell migration and invasion. Moreover, exosomal miR-21 markedly enhanced snail and vimentin expression, while significantly decreasing E-cadherin levels in OSCC cells, in vitro and in vivo Finally, circulating exosomal miR-21 levels were closely associated with HIF-1α/HIF-2α expression, T stage, and lymph node metastasis in patients with OSCC. In conclusion, our findings suggest that the hypoxic microenvironment may stimulate tumor cells to generate miR-21-rich exosomes that are delivered to normoxic cells to promote prometastatic behaviors and prompt further investigation into the therapeutic value of exosome inhibition for cancer treatment. (hide)
EV-METRIC
37% (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Cell culture supernatant
Sample origin
Hypoxic condition (1% O2)
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
ExoQuick
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ CD63
non-EV: Tubulin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function/Biomarker
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
SCC-9 Oral squamous cell carcinoma
EV-harvesting Medium
Not specified
Separation Method
Commercial kit
ExoQuick
Other
Name other separation method
ExoQuick
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
BCA
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
No
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ CD81
Not detected contaminants
Tubulin
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)(q)PCR
Database
No
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
EM
EM-type
Scanning-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
50-200
EV160017 7/8 Homo sapiens Serum ExoQuick Li L 2016 37%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Li L, Li C, Wang S, Wang Z, Jiang J, Wang W, Li X, Chen J, Liu K, Li C, Zhu G.
Journal
Cancer Res
Abstract
Hypoxia is a common feature of solid tumors and is associated with aggressiveness and poor patient o (show more...)Hypoxia is a common feature of solid tumors and is associated with aggressiveness and poor patient outcomes. Exosomes, initially considered to be cellular "garbage dumpsters," are now implicated in mediating interactions with the cellular environment. However, the mechanisms underlying the association between exosomes and hypoxia during cancer progression remain poorly understood. In this study, we found that exosomes derived from hypoxic oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) cells increased the migration and invasion of OSCC cells in a HIF-1α and HIF-2α-dependent manner. Given that exosomes have been shown to transport miRNAs to alter cellular functions, we performed miRNA sequencing of normoxic and hypoxic OSCC-derived exosomes. Of the 108 miRNAs that were differentially expressed, miR-21 stood out as one of the most significantly upregulated miRNAs under hypoxic conditions. miR-21 depletion in hypoxic OSCC cells led to decreased miR-21 levels in exosomes and significantly reduced cell migration and invasion. Conversely, restoration of miR-21 expression in HIF-1α and HIF-2α-depleted exosomes rescued OSCC cell migration and invasion. Moreover, exosomal miR-21 markedly enhanced snail and vimentin expression, while significantly decreasing E-cadherin levels in OSCC cells, in vitro and in vivo Finally, circulating exosomal miR-21 levels were closely associated with HIF-1α/HIF-2α expression, T stage, and lymph node metastasis in patients with OSCC. In conclusion, our findings suggest that the hypoxic microenvironment may stimulate tumor cells to generate miR-21-rich exosomes that are delivered to normoxic cells to promote prometastatic behaviors and prompt further investigation into the therapeutic value of exosome inhibition for cancer treatment. (hide)
EV-METRIC
37% (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Serum
Sample origin
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
ExoQuick
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ CD63
non-EV: Tubulin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function/Biomarker
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Serum
Separation Method
Commercial kit
ExoQuick
Other
Name other separation method
ExoQuick
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
BCA
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
No
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ CD81
Not detected contaminants
Tubulin
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)(q)PCR
Database
No
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
EM
EM-type
Scanning-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
50-200
EV160017 8/8 Homo sapiens Serum ExoQuick Li L 2016 37%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Li L, Li C, Wang S, Wang Z, Jiang J, Wang W, Li X, Chen J, Liu K, Li C, Zhu G.
Journal
Cancer Res
Abstract
Hypoxia is a common feature of solid tumors and is associated with aggressiveness and poor patient o (show more...)Hypoxia is a common feature of solid tumors and is associated with aggressiveness and poor patient outcomes. Exosomes, initially considered to be cellular "garbage dumpsters," are now implicated in mediating interactions with the cellular environment. However, the mechanisms underlying the association between exosomes and hypoxia during cancer progression remain poorly understood. In this study, we found that exosomes derived from hypoxic oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) cells increased the migration and invasion of OSCC cells in a HIF-1α and HIF-2α-dependent manner. Given that exosomes have been shown to transport miRNAs to alter cellular functions, we performed miRNA sequencing of normoxic and hypoxic OSCC-derived exosomes. Of the 108 miRNAs that were differentially expressed, miR-21 stood out as one of the most significantly upregulated miRNAs under hypoxic conditions. miR-21 depletion in hypoxic OSCC cells led to decreased miR-21 levels in exosomes and significantly reduced cell migration and invasion. Conversely, restoration of miR-21 expression in HIF-1α and HIF-2α-depleted exosomes rescued OSCC cell migration and invasion. Moreover, exosomal miR-21 markedly enhanced snail and vimentin expression, while significantly decreasing E-cadherin levels in OSCC cells, in vitro and in vivo Finally, circulating exosomal miR-21 levels were closely associated with HIF-1α/HIF-2α expression, T stage, and lymph node metastasis in patients with OSCC. In conclusion, our findings suggest that the hypoxic microenvironment may stimulate tumor cells to generate miR-21-rich exosomes that are delivered to normoxic cells to promote prometastatic behaviors and prompt further investigation into the therapeutic value of exosome inhibition for cancer treatment. (hide)
EV-METRIC
37% (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. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Serum
Sample origin
Oral squamous cell carcinoma patients
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
ExoQuick
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ CD63
non-EV: Tubulin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function/Biomarker
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Serum
Separation Method
Commercial kit
ExoQuick
Other
Name other separation method
ExoQuick
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
BCA
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
No
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ CD81
Not detected contaminants
Tubulin
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)(q)PCR
Database
No
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
EM
EM-type
Scanning-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
50-200
EV160002 2/3 Homo sapiens Extruded cells (NIH3T3) DC
Sequential extrusion
Lunavat TR 2016 37%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Lunavat TR, Jang SC, Nilsson L, Park HT, Repiska G, Lässer C, Nilsson JA, Gho YS, Lötvall J
Journal
Biomaterials
Abstract
To develop RNA-based therapeutics, it is crucial to create delivery vectors that transport the RNA m (show more...)To develop RNA-based therapeutics, it is crucial to create delivery vectors that transport the RNA molecule into the cell cytoplasm. Naturally released exosomes vesicles (also called "Extracellular Vesicles") have been proposed as possible RNAi carriers, but their yield is relatively small in any cell culture system. We have previously generated exosome-mimetic nanovesicles (NV) by serial extrusions of cells through nano-sized filters, which results in 100-times higher yield of extracellular vesicles. We here test 1) whether NV can be loaded with siRNA exogenously and endogenously, 2) whether the siRNA-loaded NV are taken up by recipient cells, and 3) whether the siRNA can induce functional knock-down responses in recipient cells. A siRNA against GFP was first loaded into NV by electroporation, or a c-Myc shRNA was expressed inside of the cells. The NV were efficiently loaded with siRNA with both techniques, were taken up by recipient cells, which resulted in attenuation of target gene expression. In conclusion, our study suggests that exosome-mimetic nanovesicles can be a platform for RNAi delivery to cell cytoplasm. (hide)
EV-METRIC
37% (50th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type)
 Reported
 Not reported
 Not applicable
EV-enriched proteins
Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins
non EV-enriched protein
Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein
qualitative and quantitative analysis
Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Extruded cells (NIH3T3)
Sample origin
Control condition
Focus vesicles
Nanovesicles
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
DC
Sequential extrusion
Protein markers
EV: PDGFR/ Flotillin-1/ CD9
non-EV: Calnexin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function, New methodological development
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Extruded cells (NIH3T3)
Separation Method
Density cushion
Density medium
Iodixanol
Other
Name other separation method
Sequential extrusion
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Bradford
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
No
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
PDGFR, Flotillin-1, CD9
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Size range/distribution
Reported size (nm)
180-200
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Wide-field
EV160002 3/3 Homo sapiens Extruded cells (NIH3T3) DC
Sequential extrusion
Lunavat TR 2016 37%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Lunavat TR, Jang SC, Nilsson L, Park HT, Repiska G, Lässer C, Nilsson JA, Gho YS, Lötvall J
Journal
Biomaterials
Abstract
To develop RNA-based therapeutics, it is crucial to create delivery vectors that transport the RNA m (show more...)To develop RNA-based therapeutics, it is crucial to create delivery vectors that transport the RNA molecule into the cell cytoplasm. Naturally released exosomes vesicles (also called "Extracellular Vesicles") have been proposed as possible RNAi carriers, but their yield is relatively small in any cell culture system. We have previously generated exosome-mimetic nanovesicles (NV) by serial extrusions of cells through nano-sized filters, which results in 100-times higher yield of extracellular vesicles. We here test 1) whether NV can be loaded with siRNA exogenously and endogenously, 2) whether the siRNA-loaded NV are taken up by recipient cells, and 3) whether the siRNA can induce functional knock-down responses in recipient cells. A siRNA against GFP was first loaded into NV by electroporation, or a c-Myc shRNA was expressed inside of the cells. The NV were efficiently loaded with siRNA with both techniques, were taken up by recipient cells, which resulted in attenuation of target gene expression. In conclusion, our study suggests that exosome-mimetic nanovesicles can be a platform for RNAi delivery to cell cytoplasm. (hide)
EV-METRIC
37% (50th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type)
 Reported
 Not reported
 Not applicable
EV-enriched proteins
Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins
non EV-enriched protein
Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein
qualitative and quantitative analysis
Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Extruded cells (NIH3T3)
Sample origin
cMyc shRNA
Focus vesicles
Nanovesicles
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
DC
Sequential extrusion
Protein markers
EV: PDGFR/ Flotillin-1/ CD9
non-EV: Calnexin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function, New methodological development
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Extruded cells (NIH3T3)
Separation Method
Density cushion
Density medium
Iodixanol
Other
Name other separation method
Sequential extrusion
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Bradford
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
No
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
PDGFR, Flotillin-1, CD9
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Size range/distribution
Reported size (nm)
180-200
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Wide-field
EV210321 1/3 Homo sapiens MCF7 (d)(U)C Xu CG 2016 34%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Xu CG, Yang MF, Ren YQ, Wu CH, Wang LQ
Journal
Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci
Abstract
In this study, we firstly compared the loading of urothelial carcinoma-associated 1 (UCA1) in exosom (show more...)In this study, we firstly compared the loading of urothelial carcinoma-associated 1 (UCA1) in exosomes between tamoxifen sensitive and tamoxifen resistant breast cancer cells and further investigated the role of exosomal transfer of UCA1 in the development of tamoxifen resistance in estrogen receptor (ER) positive breast cancer cells. (hide)
EV-METRIC
34% (78th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type)
 Reported
 Not reported
 Not applicable
EV-enriched proteins
Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins
non EV-enriched protein
Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein
qualitative and quantitative analysis
Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Protein markers
EV: CD63
non-EV: Actin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
MCF7
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
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 performed
Yes
Pelleting: time(min)
70
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Wash: time (min)
70
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
BCA
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63
Detected contaminants
Actin
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)-(q)PCR
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Size range/distribution
Reported size (nm)
50-100
EV concentration
Yes
EV210321 2/3 Homo sapiens LCC2 (d)(U)C Xu CG 2016 34%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Xu CG, Yang MF, Ren YQ, Wu CH, Wang LQ
Journal
Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci
Abstract
In this study, we firstly compared the loading of urothelial carcinoma-associated 1 (UCA1) in exosom (show more...)In this study, we firstly compared the loading of urothelial carcinoma-associated 1 (UCA1) in exosomes between tamoxifen sensitive and tamoxifen resistant breast cancer cells and further investigated the role of exosomal transfer of UCA1 in the development of tamoxifen resistance in estrogen receptor (ER) positive breast cancer cells. (hide)
EV-METRIC
34% (78th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type)
 Reported
 Not reported
 Not applicable
EV-enriched proteins
Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins
non EV-enriched protein
Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein
qualitative and quantitative analysis
Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Protein markers
EV: CD63
non-EV: Actin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
LCC2
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
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 performed
Yes
Pelleting: time(min)
70
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Wash: time (min)
70
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
BCA
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63
Detected contaminants
Actin
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)-(q)PCR
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Size range/distribution
Reported size (nm)
50-100
EV concentration
Yes
EV200134 1/2 Homo sapiens Blood plasma DG
(d)(U)C
Filtration
Salomon, Carlos 2016 34%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Carlos Salomon, Katherin Scholz-Romero, Suchismita Sarker, Emma Sweeney, Miharu Kobayashi, Paula Correa, Sherri Longo, Gregory Duncombe, Murray D Mitchell, Gregory E Rice, Sebastian E Illanes
Journal
Diabetes
Abstract
Although there is significant interest in elucidating the role of placenta-derived exosomes (PdEs) d (show more...)Although there is significant interest in elucidating the role of placenta-derived exosomes (PdEs) during pregnancy, the exosomal profile in pregnancies complicated by gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) remains to be established. The aim of this study was to compare the gestational-age profile of PdEs in maternal plasma of GDM with normal pregnancies and to determine the effect of exosomes on cytokine release from human umbilical vein endothelial cells. A prospective cohort of patients was sampled at three time points during pregnancy for each patient (i.e., 11-14, 22-24, and 32-36 weeks' gestation). A retrospective stratified study design was used to quantify exosomes present in maternal plasma of normal (n = 13) and GDM (n = 7) pregnancies. Gestational age and pregnancy status were identified as significant factors contributing to variation in plasma exosome concentration (ANOVA, P < 0.05). Post hoc analyses established that PdE concentration increased during gestation in both normal and GDM pregnancies; however, the increase was significantly greater in GDM (∼2.2-fold, ∼1.5-fold, and ∼1.8-fold greater at each gestational age compared with normal pregnancies). Exosomes isolated from GDM pregnancies significantly increased the release of proinflammatory cytokines from endothelial cells. Although the role of exosomes during GDM remains to be fully elucidated, exosome profiles may be of diagnostic utility for screening asymptomatic populations. (hide)
EV-METRIC
34% (69th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type)
 Reported
 Not reported
 Not applicable
EV-enriched proteins
Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins
non EV-enriched protein
Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein
qualitative and quantitative analysis
Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Blood plasma
Sample origin
Healthy pregnant
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
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
Density gradient
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Filtration
Protein markers
EV: PLAP
non-EV: None
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.122-1.156
Show all info
Study aim
Function
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
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: time(min)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
T-8100
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
10
Wash: time (min)
120
Wash: Rotor Type
T-8100
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Density gradient
Type
Discontinuous
Number of initial discontinuous layers
4
Lowest density fraction
5%
Highest density fraction
40%
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
14.5mL
Sample volume (mL)
0.5mL
Orientation
Top-down
Rotor type
T-8100
Speed (g)
100000
Duration (min)
1200
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: duration (min)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
T-8100
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Filtration steps
0.22µm or 0.2µm
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
ELISA
Antibody details provided?
No
Detected EV-associated proteins
PLAP
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
103 - 110nm
EV concentration
Yes
51 - 100 of 797 keyboard_arrow_leftkeyboard_arrow_right