EV-TRACK

Search > Results

You searched for: EV180021 (EV-TRACK ID)

Showing 1 - 4 of 4

Results list Study Tree

Details	EV-TRACK ID	Experiment nr.	Species	Sample type	Separation protocol	First author	Year	EV-METRIC
	EV180021	3/4	Homo sapiens	Serum	(d)(U)C Filtration	Bachurski, Daniel	2019	77%
Study summary Full title Extracellular vesicle measurements with nanoparticle tracking analysis – An accuracy and repeatability comparison between NanoSight NS300 and ZetaView All authors Daniel Bachurski ORCID Icon, Maximiliane Schuldner, Phuong-Hien Nguyen, Alexandra Malz, Katrin S Reiners, Patricia C Grenzi ORCID Icon, Felix Babatz, Astrid C Schauss, Hinrich P Hansen, Michael Hallek & Elke Pogge von Strandmann Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract The expanding field of extracellular vesicle (EV) research needs reproducible and accurate methods t (show more...)The expanding field of extracellular vesicle (EV) research needs reproducible and accurate methods to characterize single EVs. Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis (NTA) is commonly used to determine EV concentration and diameter. As the EV field is lacking methods to easily confirm and validate NTA data, questioning the reliability of measurements remains highly important. In this regard, a comparison addressing measurement quality between different NTA devices such as Malvern’s NanoSight NS300 or Particle Metrix’ ZetaView has not yet been conducted. To evaluate the accuracy and repeatability of size and concentration determinations of both devices, we employed comparative methods including transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and single particle interferometric reflectance imaging sensing (SP-IRIS) by ExoView. Multiple test measurements with nanospheres, liposomes and ultracentrifuged EVs from human serum and cell culture supernatant were performed. Additionally, serial dilutions and freeze-thaw cycle-dependent EV decrease were measured to determine the robustness of each system. Strikingly, NanoSight NS300 exhibited a 2.0–2.1-fold overestimation of polystyrene and silica nanosphere concentration. By measuring serial dilutions of EV samples, we demonstrated higher accuracy in concentration determination by ZetaView (% BIAS range: 2.7–8.5) in comparison with NanoSight NS300 (% BIAS range: 32.9–36.8). The concentration measurements by ZetaView were also more precise (% CV range: 0.0–4.7) than measurements by NanoSight NS300 (% CV range: 5.4–10.7). On the contrary, quantitative TEM imaging indicated more accurate EV sizing by NanoSight NS300 (% DTEM range: 79.5–134.3) compared to ZetaView (% DTEM range: 111.8–205.7), while being equally repeatable (NanoSight NS300% CV range: 0.8–6.7; ZetaView: 1.4–7.8). However, both devices failed to report a peak EV diameter below 60 nm compared to TEM and SP-IRIS. Taken together, NTA devices differ strongly in their hardware and software affecting measuring results. ZetaView provided a more accurate and repeatable depiction of EV concentration, whereas NanoSight NS300 supplied size measurements of higher resolution. (hide) EV-METRIC 77% (99th 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 (d)(U)C Filtration Adj. k-factor 209.7 (pelleting) / 89.2 (washing) Protein markers EV: TSG101/ HSP70/ CD63/ CD9/ CD81 non-EV: Calnexin Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Serum Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 90 Pelleting: rotor type Type 45 Ti Pelleting: speed (g) 100000 Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 209.7 Wash: time (min) 90 Wash: Rotor Type TLA-55 Wash: speed (g) 100000 Wash: adjusted k-factor 89.20 Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Characterization: Protein analysis Protein Concentration Method BCA Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins CD63, HSP70, TSG101 Not detected contaminants Calnexin Characterization: Lipid analysis Yes Characterization: Particle analysis NTA Report type Size range/distribution Reported size (nm) 50-200 EV concentration Yes EM EM-type Transmission-EM Image type Close-up, Wide-field Report size (nm) 30-100 Other particle analysis name(1) ExoView Report type Size range/distribution Report size 50-100 EV-concentration No Extra information EV-Track data set is associated with a technical paper comparing different NTA devices assessed by TEM and ExoView

	EV180021	4/4	Homo sapiens	L540	(d)(U)C Filtration	Bachurski, Daniel	2019	77%
Study summary Full title Extracellular vesicle measurements with nanoparticle tracking analysis – An accuracy and repeatability comparison between NanoSight NS300 and ZetaView All authors Daniel Bachurski ORCID Icon, Maximiliane Schuldner, Phuong-Hien Nguyen, Alexandra Malz, Katrin S Reiners, Patricia C Grenzi ORCID Icon, Felix Babatz, Astrid C Schauss, Hinrich P Hansen, Michael Hallek & Elke Pogge von Strandmann Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract The expanding field of extracellular vesicle (EV) research needs reproducible and accurate methods t (show more...)The expanding field of extracellular vesicle (EV) research needs reproducible and accurate methods to characterize single EVs. Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis (NTA) is commonly used to determine EV concentration and diameter. As the EV field is lacking methods to easily confirm and validate NTA data, questioning the reliability of measurements remains highly important. In this regard, a comparison addressing measurement quality between different NTA devices such as Malvern’s NanoSight NS300 or Particle Metrix’ ZetaView has not yet been conducted. To evaluate the accuracy and repeatability of size and concentration determinations of both devices, we employed comparative methods including transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and single particle interferometric reflectance imaging sensing (SP-IRIS) by ExoView. Multiple test measurements with nanospheres, liposomes and ultracentrifuged EVs from human serum and cell culture supernatant were performed. Additionally, serial dilutions and freeze-thaw cycle-dependent EV decrease were measured to determine the robustness of each system. Strikingly, NanoSight NS300 exhibited a 2.0–2.1-fold overestimation of polystyrene and silica nanosphere concentration. By measuring serial dilutions of EV samples, we demonstrated higher accuracy in concentration determination by ZetaView (% BIAS range: 2.7–8.5) in comparison with NanoSight NS300 (% BIAS range: 32.9–36.8). The concentration measurements by ZetaView were also more precise (% CV range: 0.0–4.7) than measurements by NanoSight NS300 (% CV range: 5.4–10.7). On the contrary, quantitative TEM imaging indicated more accurate EV sizing by NanoSight NS300 (% DTEM range: 79.5–134.3) compared to ZetaView (% DTEM range: 111.8–205.7), while being equally repeatable (NanoSight NS300% CV range: 0.8–6.7; ZetaView: 1.4–7.8). However, both devices failed to report a peak EV diameter below 60 nm compared to TEM and SP-IRIS. Taken together, NTA devices differ strongly in their hardware and software affecting measuring results. ZetaView provided a more accurate and repeatable depiction of EV concentration, whereas NanoSight NS300 supplied size measurements of higher resolution. (hide) EV-METRIC 77% (97th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type) Reported Not reported Not applicable EV-enriched proteins Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins non EV-enriched protein Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein qualitative and quantitative analysis Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. 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 Filtration Adj. k-factor 209.7 (pelleting) / 89.2 (washing) Protein markers EV: TSG101/ HSP70/ CD63/ CD9/ CD81 non-EV: Calnexin Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-producing cells L540 EV-harvesting Medium Serum free medium Cell viability (%) NA 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) 90 Pelleting: rotor type Type 45 Ti Pelleting: speed (g) 100000 Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 209.7 Wash: time (min) 90 Wash: Rotor Type TLA-55 Wash: speed (g) 100000 Wash: adjusted k-factor 89.20 Filtration steps 0.22µm or 0.2µm Characterization: Protein analysis Protein Concentration Method BCA Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins CD63, HSP70, TSG101 Not detected contaminants Calnexin Characterization: Lipid analysis Yes Characterization: Particle analysis NTA Report type Size range/distribution Reported size (nm) 50-400 EV concentration Yes EM EM-type Transmission-EM Image type Close-up, Wide-field Report size (nm) 30-150 Other particle analysis name(1) ExoView Report type Size range/distribution Report size 50-100 EV-concentration No Extra information EV-Track data set is associated with a technical paper comparing different NTA devices assessed by TEM and ExoView

	EV180021	1/4	Homo sapiens	L540	(d)(U)C	Bachurski, Daniel	2019	66%
Study summary Full title Extracellular vesicle measurements with nanoparticle tracking analysis – An accuracy and repeatability comparison between NanoSight NS300 and ZetaView All authors Daniel Bachurski ORCID Icon, Maximiliane Schuldner, Phuong-Hien Nguyen, Alexandra Malz, Katrin S Reiners, Patricia C Grenzi ORCID Icon, Felix Babatz, Astrid C Schauss, Hinrich P Hansen, Michael Hallek & Elke Pogge von Strandmann Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract The expanding field of extracellular vesicle (EV) research needs reproducible and accurate methods t (show more...)The expanding field of extracellular vesicle (EV) research needs reproducible and accurate methods to characterize single EVs. Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis (NTA) is commonly used to determine EV concentration and diameter. As the EV field is lacking methods to easily confirm and validate NTA data, questioning the reliability of measurements remains highly important. In this regard, a comparison addressing measurement quality between different NTA devices such as Malvern’s NanoSight NS300 or Particle Metrix’ ZetaView has not yet been conducted. To evaluate the accuracy and repeatability of size and concentration determinations of both devices, we employed comparative methods including transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and single particle interferometric reflectance imaging sensing (SP-IRIS) by ExoView. Multiple test measurements with nanospheres, liposomes and ultracentrifuged EVs from human serum and cell culture supernatant were performed. Additionally, serial dilutions and freeze-thaw cycle-dependent EV decrease were measured to determine the robustness of each system. Strikingly, NanoSight NS300 exhibited a 2.0–2.1-fold overestimation of polystyrene and silica nanosphere concentration. By measuring serial dilutions of EV samples, we demonstrated higher accuracy in concentration determination by ZetaView (% BIAS range: 2.7–8.5) in comparison with NanoSight NS300 (% BIAS range: 32.9–36.8). The concentration measurements by ZetaView were also more precise (% CV range: 0.0–4.7) than measurements by NanoSight NS300 (% CV range: 5.4–10.7). On the contrary, quantitative TEM imaging indicated more accurate EV sizing by NanoSight NS300 (% DTEM range: 79.5–134.3) compared to ZetaView (% DTEM range: 111.8–205.7), while being equally repeatable (NanoSight NS300% CV range: 0.8–6.7; ZetaView: 1.4–7.8). However, both devices failed to report a peak EV diameter below 60 nm compared to TEM and SP-IRIS. Taken together, NTA devices differ strongly in their hardware and software affecting measuring results. ZetaView provided a more accurate and repeatable depiction of EV concentration, whereas NanoSight NS300 supplied size measurements of higher resolution. (hide) EV-METRIC 66% (93rd 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 Adj. k-factor 892 (washing) Protein markers EV: TSG101/ HSP70/ CD63/ CD9/ CD81 non-EV: Calnexin Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-producing cells L540 EV-harvesting Medium Serum free medium Cell viability (%) NA Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 30 Pelleting: speed (g) 10000 Wash: time (min) 30 Wash: Rotor Type TLA-55 Wash: speed (g) 10000 Wash: adjusted k-factor 892.0 Characterization: Protein analysis Protein Concentration Method BCA Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins CD63, HSP70, TSG101 Not detected contaminants Calnexin Characterization: Lipid analysis Yes Characterization: Particle analysis NTA Report type Size range/distribution Reported size (nm) 100-500 EV concentration Yes EM EM-type Transmission-EM Image type Close-up, Wide-field Report size (nm) 30-200 Other particle analysis name(1) ExoView Report type Size range/distribution Report size 50-200 EV-concentration No Extra information EV-Track data set is associated with a technical paper comparing different NTA devices assessed by TEM and ExoView

	EV180021	2/4	Homo sapiens	Serum	(d)(U)C	Bachurski, Daniel	2019	66%
Study summary Full title Extracellular vesicle measurements with nanoparticle tracking analysis – An accuracy and repeatability comparison between NanoSight NS300 and ZetaView All authors Daniel Bachurski ORCID Icon, Maximiliane Schuldner, Phuong-Hien Nguyen, Alexandra Malz, Katrin S Reiners, Patricia C Grenzi ORCID Icon, Felix Babatz, Astrid C Schauss, Hinrich P Hansen, Michael Hallek & Elke Pogge von Strandmann Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract The expanding field of extracellular vesicle (EV) research needs reproducible and accurate methods t (show more...)The expanding field of extracellular vesicle (EV) research needs reproducible and accurate methods to characterize single EVs. Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis (NTA) is commonly used to determine EV concentration and diameter. As the EV field is lacking methods to easily confirm and validate NTA data, questioning the reliability of measurements remains highly important. In this regard, a comparison addressing measurement quality between different NTA devices such as Malvern’s NanoSight NS300 or Particle Metrix’ ZetaView has not yet been conducted. To evaluate the accuracy and repeatability of size and concentration determinations of both devices, we employed comparative methods including transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and single particle interferometric reflectance imaging sensing (SP-IRIS) by ExoView. Multiple test measurements with nanospheres, liposomes and ultracentrifuged EVs from human serum and cell culture supernatant were performed. Additionally, serial dilutions and freeze-thaw cycle-dependent EV decrease were measured to determine the robustness of each system. Strikingly, NanoSight NS300 exhibited a 2.0–2.1-fold overestimation of polystyrene and silica nanosphere concentration. By measuring serial dilutions of EV samples, we demonstrated higher accuracy in concentration determination by ZetaView (% BIAS range: 2.7–8.5) in comparison with NanoSight NS300 (% BIAS range: 32.9–36.8). The concentration measurements by ZetaView were also more precise (% CV range: 0.0–4.7) than measurements by NanoSight NS300 (% CV range: 5.4–10.7). On the contrary, quantitative TEM imaging indicated more accurate EV sizing by NanoSight NS300 (% DTEM range: 79.5–134.3) compared to ZetaView (% DTEM range: 111.8–205.7), while being equally repeatable (NanoSight NS300% CV range: 0.8–6.7; ZetaView: 1.4–7.8). However, both devices failed to report a peak EV diameter below 60 nm compared to TEM and SP-IRIS. Taken together, NTA devices differ strongly in their hardware and software affecting measuring results. ZetaView provided a more accurate and repeatable depiction of EV concentration, whereas NanoSight NS300 supplied size measurements of higher resolution. (hide) EV-METRIC 66% (95th 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 (d)(U)C Adj. k-factor 892 (washing) Protein markers EV: HSP70/ CD63/ CD9 non-EV: Calnexin Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Serum Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 30 Pelleting: speed (g) 10000 Wash: time (min) 30 Wash: Rotor Type TLA-55 Wash: speed (g) 10000 Wash: adjusted k-factor 892.0 Characterization: Protein analysis Protein Concentration Method BCA Western Blot Detected EV-associated proteins CD63, HSP70 Not detected contaminants Calnexin Characterization: Lipid analysis Yes Characterization: Particle analysis NTA Report type Size range/distribution Reported size (nm) 100-500 EV concentration Yes EM EM-type Transmission-EM Image type Close-up, Wide-field Report size (nm) 30-500 Other particle analysis name(1) ExoView Report type Size range/distribution Report size 50-200 EV-concentration No Extra information EV-Track data set is associated with a technical paper comparing different NTA devices assessed by TEM and ExoView

				1 - 4 of 4

EV-TRACK ID	EV180021
species	Homo sapiens
sample type	Serum	Cell culture	Cell culture	Serum
cell type	NA	L540	L540	NA
medium	NA	Serum free medium	Serum free medium	NA
condition	Control condition	Control condition	Control condition	Control condition
separation protocol	(d)(U)C Filtration	(d)(U)C Filtration	(d)(U)C	(d)(U)C
Exp. nr.	3	4	1	2
EV-METRIC %	77	77	66	66