TRANSPARENT REPORTING AND CENTRALIZING KNOWLEDGE
IN EXTRACELLULAR VESICLE RESEARCH
chevron_left
Search About Reviewers & editors My EV-TRACK
chevron_right
Search > Results

You searched for: EV180029 (EV-TRACK ID)

Showing 1 - 8 of 8

Results list Study Tree
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 type, Vesicle type, Culture condition
Experiment number
  • Experiments differ in Sample type, Vesicle type, Culture condition
Experiment number
  • Experiments differ in Sample type, Vesicle type, Culture condition
Experiment number
  • Experiments differ in Sample type, Vesicle type, Culture condition
Experiment number
  • Experiments differ in Sample type, Vesicle type, Culture condition
Experiment number
  • Experiments differ in Sample type, Vesicle type, Culture condition
Experiment number
  • Experiments differ in Sample type, Vesicle type, Culture condition
Experiment number
  • Experiments differ in Sample type, Vesicle type, Culture condition
Details EV-TRACK ID Experiment nr. Species Sample type Separation protocol First author Year EV-METRIC
EV180029 1/8 Homo sapiens PC3 (d)(U)C Palviainen, Mari 2019 66%

Study summary

Full title
Metabolic signature of extracellular vesicles depends on the cell culture conditions
All authors
Mari Palviainen ORCID Icon, Heikki Saari ORCID Icon, Olli Kärkkäinen ORCID Icon, Jenna Pekkinen, Seppo Auriola, Marjo Yliperttula, Maija Puhka, Kati Hanhineva & Pia R.-M. Siljander
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
One of the greatest bottlenecks in extracellular vesicle (EV) research is the production of sufficie (show more...)One of the greatest bottlenecks in extracellular vesicle (EV) research is the production of sufficient material in a consistent and effective way using in vitro cell models. Although the production of EVs in bioreactors maximizes EV yield in comparison to conventional cell cultures, the impact of their cell growth conditions on EVs has not yet been established. In this study, we grew two prostate cancer cell lines, PC-3 and VCaP, in conventional cell culture dishes and in two-chamber bioreactors to elucidate how the growth environment affects the EV characteristics. Specifically, we wanted to investigate the growth condition-dependent differences by non-targeted metabolite profiling using liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC–MS) analysis. EVs were also characterized by their morphology, size distribution, and EV protein marker expression, and the EV yields were quantified by NTA. The use of bioreactor increased the EV yield >100 times compared to the conventional cell culture system. Regarding morphology, size distribution and surface markers, only minor differences were observed between the bioreactor-derived EVs (BR-EVs) and the EVs obtained from cells grown in conventional cell cultures (C-EVs). In contrast, metabolomic analysis revealed statistically significant differences in both polar and non-polar metabolites when the BR-EVs were compared to the C-EVs. The results show that the growth conditions markedly affected the EV metabolite profiles and that metabolomics was a sensitive tool to study molecular differences of EVs. We conclude that the cell culture conditions of EV production should be standardized and carefully detailed in publications and care should be taken when EVs from different production platforms are compared with each other for systemic effects. (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
142.9 (pelleting) / 89.2 (washing)
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ TSG101/ CD29/ CD9
non-EV: calnexin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
PC3
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted serum
Preparation of EDS
overnight (16h) at >=100,000g
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
Type 50.2 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
110000
Pelleting: adjusted k-factor
142.9
Wash: time (min)
120
Wash: Rotor Type
TLA-55
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Wash: adjusted k-factor
89.20
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Lowry-based assay
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9, CD81, TSG101, CD29
Not detected contaminants
calnexin
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
PMID previous EV particle analysis
Electron microscopy
Extra particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
144.8
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Wide-field
EV180029 2/8 Homo sapiens VCaP (d)(U)C Palviainen, Mari 2019 66%

Study summary

Full title
Metabolic signature of extracellular vesicles depends on the cell culture conditions
All authors
Mari Palviainen ORCID Icon, Heikki Saari ORCID Icon, Olli Kärkkäinen ORCID Icon, Jenna Pekkinen, Seppo Auriola, Marjo Yliperttula, Maija Puhka, Kati Hanhineva & Pia R.-M. Siljander
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
One of the greatest bottlenecks in extracellular vesicle (EV) research is the production of sufficie (show more...)One of the greatest bottlenecks in extracellular vesicle (EV) research is the production of sufficient material in a consistent and effective way using in vitro cell models. Although the production of EVs in bioreactors maximizes EV yield in comparison to conventional cell cultures, the impact of their cell growth conditions on EVs has not yet been established. In this study, we grew two prostate cancer cell lines, PC-3 and VCaP, in conventional cell culture dishes and in two-chamber bioreactors to elucidate how the growth environment affects the EV characteristics. Specifically, we wanted to investigate the growth condition-dependent differences by non-targeted metabolite profiling using liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC–MS) analysis. EVs were also characterized by their morphology, size distribution, and EV protein marker expression, and the EV yields were quantified by NTA. The use of bioreactor increased the EV yield >100 times compared to the conventional cell culture system. Regarding morphology, size distribution and surface markers, only minor differences were observed between the bioreactor-derived EVs (BR-EVs) and the EVs obtained from cells grown in conventional cell cultures (C-EVs). In contrast, metabolomic analysis revealed statistically significant differences in both polar and non-polar metabolites when the BR-EVs were compared to the C-EVs. The results show that the growth conditions markedly affected the EV metabolite profiles and that metabolomics was a sensitive tool to study molecular differences of EVs. We conclude that the cell culture conditions of EV production should be standardized and carefully detailed in publications and care should be taken when EVs from different production platforms are compared with each other for systemic effects. (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
142.9 (pelleting) / 89.2 (washing)
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ TSG101/ CD29/ CD9
non-EV: calnexin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
VCaP
EV-harvesting Medium
Serum-containing, but physical separation of serum EVs and secreted EVs (e.g. Bioreactor flask)
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
Type 50.2 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
110000
Pelleting: adjusted k-factor
142.9
Wash: time (min)
120
Wash: Rotor Type
TLA-55
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Wash: adjusted k-factor
89.20
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Lowry-based assay
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9, CD81, TSG101, CD29
Not detected contaminants
calnexin
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
PMID previous EV particle analysis
Electron microscopy
Extra particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
88
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up
EV180029 3/8 Homo sapiens PC3 (d)(U)C Palviainen, Mari 2019 66%

Study summary

Full title
Metabolic signature of extracellular vesicles depends on the cell culture conditions
All authors
Mari Palviainen ORCID Icon, Heikki Saari ORCID Icon, Olli Kärkkäinen ORCID Icon, Jenna Pekkinen, Seppo Auriola, Marjo Yliperttula, Maija Puhka, Kati Hanhineva & Pia R.-M. Siljander
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
One of the greatest bottlenecks in extracellular vesicle (EV) research is the production of sufficie (show more...)One of the greatest bottlenecks in extracellular vesicle (EV) research is the production of sufficient material in a consistent and effective way using in vitro cell models. Although the production of EVs in bioreactors maximizes EV yield in comparison to conventional cell cultures, the impact of their cell growth conditions on EVs has not yet been established. In this study, we grew two prostate cancer cell lines, PC-3 and VCaP, in conventional cell culture dishes and in two-chamber bioreactors to elucidate how the growth environment affects the EV characteristics. Specifically, we wanted to investigate the growth condition-dependent differences by non-targeted metabolite profiling using liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC–MS) analysis. EVs were also characterized by their morphology, size distribution, and EV protein marker expression, and the EV yields were quantified by NTA. The use of bioreactor increased the EV yield >100 times compared to the conventional cell culture system. Regarding morphology, size distribution and surface markers, only minor differences were observed between the bioreactor-derived EVs (BR-EVs) and the EVs obtained from cells grown in conventional cell cultures (C-EVs). In contrast, metabolomic analysis revealed statistically significant differences in both polar and non-polar metabolites when the BR-EVs were compared to the C-EVs. The results show that the growth conditions markedly affected the EV metabolite profiles and that metabolomics was a sensitive tool to study molecular differences of EVs. We conclude that the cell culture conditions of EV production should be standardized and carefully detailed in publications and care should be taken when EVs from different production platforms are compared with each other for systemic effects. (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
785.9 (pelleting) / 89.2 (washing)
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ TSG101/ CD29/ CD9
non-EV: calnexin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
PC3
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted serum
Preparation of EDS
overnight (16h) at >=100,000g
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)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 50.2 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
20000
Pelleting: adjusted k-factor
785.9
Wash: time (min)
120
Wash: Rotor Type
TLA-55
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Wash: adjusted k-factor
89.20
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Lowry-based assay
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9, CD81, TSG101, CD29
Not detected contaminants
calnexin
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
PMID previous EV particle analysis
Electron microscopy
Extra particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
178.3
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Wide-field
EV180029 4/8 Homo sapiens VCaP (d)(U)C Palviainen, Mari 2019 66%

Study summary

Full title
Metabolic signature of extracellular vesicles depends on the cell culture conditions
All authors
Mari Palviainen ORCID Icon, Heikki Saari ORCID Icon, Olli Kärkkäinen ORCID Icon, Jenna Pekkinen, Seppo Auriola, Marjo Yliperttula, Maija Puhka, Kati Hanhineva & Pia R.-M. Siljander
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
One of the greatest bottlenecks in extracellular vesicle (EV) research is the production of sufficie (show more...)One of the greatest bottlenecks in extracellular vesicle (EV) research is the production of sufficient material in a consistent and effective way using in vitro cell models. Although the production of EVs in bioreactors maximizes EV yield in comparison to conventional cell cultures, the impact of their cell growth conditions on EVs has not yet been established. In this study, we grew two prostate cancer cell lines, PC-3 and VCaP, in conventional cell culture dishes and in two-chamber bioreactors to elucidate how the growth environment affects the EV characteristics. Specifically, we wanted to investigate the growth condition-dependent differences by non-targeted metabolite profiling using liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC–MS) analysis. EVs were also characterized by their morphology, size distribution, and EV protein marker expression, and the EV yields were quantified by NTA. The use of bioreactor increased the EV yield >100 times compared to the conventional cell culture system. Regarding morphology, size distribution and surface markers, only minor differences were observed between the bioreactor-derived EVs (BR-EVs) and the EVs obtained from cells grown in conventional cell cultures (C-EVs). In contrast, metabolomic analysis revealed statistically significant differences in both polar and non-polar metabolites when the BR-EVs were compared to the C-EVs. The results show that the growth conditions markedly affected the EV metabolite profiles and that metabolomics was a sensitive tool to study molecular differences of EVs. We conclude that the cell culture conditions of EV production should be standardized and carefully detailed in publications and care should be taken when EVs from different production platforms are compared with each other for systemic effects. (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
142.9 (pelleting) / 89.2 (washing)
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ TSG101/ CD29/ CD9
non-EV: calnexin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
VCaP
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted serum
Preparation of EDS
overnight (16h) at >=100,000g
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
Type 50.2 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
110000
Pelleting: adjusted k-factor
142.9
Wash: time (min)
120
Wash: Rotor Type
TLA-55
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Wash: adjusted k-factor
89.20
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Lowry-based assay
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9, CD81, TSG101, CD29
Not detected contaminants
calnexin
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
PMID previous EV particle analysis
Electron microscopy
Extra particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
111
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Wide-field
EV180029 5/8 Homo sapiens VCaP (d)(U)C Palviainen, Mari 2019 66%

Study summary

Full title
Metabolic signature of extracellular vesicles depends on the cell culture conditions
All authors
Mari Palviainen ORCID Icon, Heikki Saari ORCID Icon, Olli Kärkkäinen ORCID Icon, Jenna Pekkinen, Seppo Auriola, Marjo Yliperttula, Maija Puhka, Kati Hanhineva & Pia R.-M. Siljander
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
One of the greatest bottlenecks in extracellular vesicle (EV) research is the production of sufficie (show more...)One of the greatest bottlenecks in extracellular vesicle (EV) research is the production of sufficient material in a consistent and effective way using in vitro cell models. Although the production of EVs in bioreactors maximizes EV yield in comparison to conventional cell cultures, the impact of their cell growth conditions on EVs has not yet been established. In this study, we grew two prostate cancer cell lines, PC-3 and VCaP, in conventional cell culture dishes and in two-chamber bioreactors to elucidate how the growth environment affects the EV characteristics. Specifically, we wanted to investigate the growth condition-dependent differences by non-targeted metabolite profiling using liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC–MS) analysis. EVs were also characterized by their morphology, size distribution, and EV protein marker expression, and the EV yields were quantified by NTA. The use of bioreactor increased the EV yield >100 times compared to the conventional cell culture system. Regarding morphology, size distribution and surface markers, only minor differences were observed between the bioreactor-derived EVs (BR-EVs) and the EVs obtained from cells grown in conventional cell cultures (C-EVs). In contrast, metabolomic analysis revealed statistically significant differences in both polar and non-polar metabolites when the BR-EVs were compared to the C-EVs. The results show that the growth conditions markedly affected the EV metabolite profiles and that metabolomics was a sensitive tool to study molecular differences of EVs. We conclude that the cell culture conditions of EV production should be standardized and carefully detailed in publications and care should be taken when EVs from different production platforms are compared with each other for systemic effects. (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
785.9 (pelleting) / 89.2 (washing)
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ TSG101/ CD29/ CD9
non-EV: calnexin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
VCaP
EV-harvesting Medium
Serum-containing, but physical separation of serum EVs and secreted EVs (e.g. Bioreactor flask)
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)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 50.2 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
20000
Pelleting: adjusted k-factor
785.9
Wash: time (min)
120
Wash: Rotor Type
TLA-55
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Wash: adjusted k-factor
89.20
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Lowry-based assay
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9, CD81, TSG101, CD29
Not detected contaminants
calnexin
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
PMID previous EV particle analysis
Electron microscopy
Extra particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
122.7
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up
EV180029 6/8 Homo sapiens PC3 (d)(U)C Palviainen, Mari 2019 66%

Study summary

Full title
Metabolic signature of extracellular vesicles depends on the cell culture conditions
All authors
Mari Palviainen ORCID Icon, Heikki Saari ORCID Icon, Olli Kärkkäinen ORCID Icon, Jenna Pekkinen, Seppo Auriola, Marjo Yliperttula, Maija Puhka, Kati Hanhineva & Pia R.-M. Siljander
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
One of the greatest bottlenecks in extracellular vesicle (EV) research is the production of sufficie (show more...)One of the greatest bottlenecks in extracellular vesicle (EV) research is the production of sufficient material in a consistent and effective way using in vitro cell models. Although the production of EVs in bioreactors maximizes EV yield in comparison to conventional cell cultures, the impact of their cell growth conditions on EVs has not yet been established. In this study, we grew two prostate cancer cell lines, PC-3 and VCaP, in conventional cell culture dishes and in two-chamber bioreactors to elucidate how the growth environment affects the EV characteristics. Specifically, we wanted to investigate the growth condition-dependent differences by non-targeted metabolite profiling using liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC–MS) analysis. EVs were also characterized by their morphology, size distribution, and EV protein marker expression, and the EV yields were quantified by NTA. The use of bioreactor increased the EV yield >100 times compared to the conventional cell culture system. Regarding morphology, size distribution and surface markers, only minor differences were observed between the bioreactor-derived EVs (BR-EVs) and the EVs obtained from cells grown in conventional cell cultures (C-EVs). In contrast, metabolomic analysis revealed statistically significant differences in both polar and non-polar metabolites when the BR-EVs were compared to the C-EVs. The results show that the growth conditions markedly affected the EV metabolite profiles and that metabolomics was a sensitive tool to study molecular differences of EVs. We conclude that the cell culture conditions of EV production should be standardized and carefully detailed in publications and care should be taken when EVs from different production platforms are compared with each other for systemic effects. (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
142.9 (pelleting) / 89.2 (washing)
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ TSG101/ CD29/ CD9
non-EV: calnexin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
PC3
EV-harvesting Medium
Serum-containing, but physical separation of serum EVs and secreted EVs (e.g. Bioreactor flask)
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
Type 50.2 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
110000
Pelleting: adjusted k-factor
142.9
Wash: time (min)
120
Wash: Rotor Type
TLA-55
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Wash: adjusted k-factor
89.20
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Lowry-based assay
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9, CD81, TSG101, CD29
Not detected contaminants
calnexin
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
PMID previous EV particle analysis
Electron microscopy
Extra particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
118.7
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Wide-field
EV180029 7/8 Homo sapiens PC3 (d)(U)C Palviainen, Mari 2019 66%

Study summary

Full title
Metabolic signature of extracellular vesicles depends on the cell culture conditions
All authors
Mari Palviainen ORCID Icon, Heikki Saari ORCID Icon, Olli Kärkkäinen ORCID Icon, Jenna Pekkinen, Seppo Auriola, Marjo Yliperttula, Maija Puhka, Kati Hanhineva & Pia R.-M. Siljander
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
One of the greatest bottlenecks in extracellular vesicle (EV) research is the production of sufficie (show more...)One of the greatest bottlenecks in extracellular vesicle (EV) research is the production of sufficient material in a consistent and effective way using in vitro cell models. Although the production of EVs in bioreactors maximizes EV yield in comparison to conventional cell cultures, the impact of their cell growth conditions on EVs has not yet been established. In this study, we grew two prostate cancer cell lines, PC-3 and VCaP, in conventional cell culture dishes and in two-chamber bioreactors to elucidate how the growth environment affects the EV characteristics. Specifically, we wanted to investigate the growth condition-dependent differences by non-targeted metabolite profiling using liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC–MS) analysis. EVs were also characterized by their morphology, size distribution, and EV protein marker expression, and the EV yields were quantified by NTA. The use of bioreactor increased the EV yield >100 times compared to the conventional cell culture system. Regarding morphology, size distribution and surface markers, only minor differences were observed between the bioreactor-derived EVs (BR-EVs) and the EVs obtained from cells grown in conventional cell cultures (C-EVs). In contrast, metabolomic analysis revealed statistically significant differences in both polar and non-polar metabolites when the BR-EVs were compared to the C-EVs. The results show that the growth conditions markedly affected the EV metabolite profiles and that metabolomics was a sensitive tool to study molecular differences of EVs. We conclude that the cell culture conditions of EV production should be standardized and carefully detailed in publications and care should be taken when EVs from different production platforms are compared with each other for systemic effects. (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
785.9 (pelleting) / 89.2 (washing)
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ TSG101/ CD29/ CD9
non-EV: calnexin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
PC3
EV-harvesting Medium
Serum-containing, but physical separation of serum EVs and secreted EVs (e.g. Bioreactor flask)
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)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 50.2 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
20000
Pelleting: adjusted k-factor
785.9
Wash: time (min)
120
Wash: Rotor Type
TLA-55
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Wash: adjusted k-factor
89.20
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Lowry-based assay
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9, CD81, TSG101, CD29
Not detected contaminants
calnexin
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
PMID previous EV particle analysis
Electron microscopy
Extra particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
148.8
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Wide-field
EV180029 8/8 Homo sapiens VCaP (d)(U)C Palviainen, Mari 2019 66%

Study summary

Full title
Metabolic signature of extracellular vesicles depends on the cell culture conditions
All authors
Mari Palviainen ORCID Icon, Heikki Saari ORCID Icon, Olli Kärkkäinen ORCID Icon, Jenna Pekkinen, Seppo Auriola, Marjo Yliperttula, Maija Puhka, Kati Hanhineva & Pia R.-M. Siljander
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
One of the greatest bottlenecks in extracellular vesicle (EV) research is the production of sufficie (show more...)One of the greatest bottlenecks in extracellular vesicle (EV) research is the production of sufficient material in a consistent and effective way using in vitro cell models. Although the production of EVs in bioreactors maximizes EV yield in comparison to conventional cell cultures, the impact of their cell growth conditions on EVs has not yet been established. In this study, we grew two prostate cancer cell lines, PC-3 and VCaP, in conventional cell culture dishes and in two-chamber bioreactors to elucidate how the growth environment affects the EV characteristics. Specifically, we wanted to investigate the growth condition-dependent differences by non-targeted metabolite profiling using liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC–MS) analysis. EVs were also characterized by their morphology, size distribution, and EV protein marker expression, and the EV yields were quantified by NTA. The use of bioreactor increased the EV yield >100 times compared to the conventional cell culture system. Regarding morphology, size distribution and surface markers, only minor differences were observed between the bioreactor-derived EVs (BR-EVs) and the EVs obtained from cells grown in conventional cell cultures (C-EVs). In contrast, metabolomic analysis revealed statistically significant differences in both polar and non-polar metabolites when the BR-EVs were compared to the C-EVs. The results show that the growth conditions markedly affected the EV metabolite profiles and that metabolomics was a sensitive tool to study molecular differences of EVs. We conclude that the cell culture conditions of EV production should be standardized and carefully detailed in publications and care should be taken when EVs from different production platforms are compared with each other for systemic effects. (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
785.9 (pelleting) / 89.2 (washing)
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ TSG101/ CD29/ CD9
non-EV: calnexin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
VCaP
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted serum
Preparation of EDS
overnight (16h) at >=100,000g
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)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 50.2 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
20000
Pelleting: adjusted k-factor
785.9
Wash: time (min)
120
Wash: Rotor Type
TLA-55
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Wash: adjusted k-factor
89.20
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Lowry-based assay
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9, CD81, TSG101, CD29
Not detected contaminants
calnexin
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
PMID previous EV particle analysis
Electron microscopy
Extra particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
121.4
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Wide-field
1 - 8 of 8
  • CM = Commercial method
  • dUC = differential ultracentrifugation
  • DG = density gradient
  • UF = ultrafiltration
  • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
EV-TRACK ID
EV180029
species
Homo
sapiens
sample type
Cell
culture
cell type
PC3
VCaP
PC3
VCaP
VCaP
PC3
PC3
VCaP
medium
EV-depleted
serum
Serum-containing
but
physical
separation
of
serum
EVs
and
secreted
EVs
(e.g.
Bioreactor
flask)
EV-depleted
serum
EV-depleted
serum
Serum-containing
but
physical
separation
of
serum
EVs
and
secreted
EVs
(e.g.
Bioreactor
flask)
Serum-containing
but
physical
separation
of
serum
EVs
and
secreted
EVs
(e.g.
Bioreactor
flask)
Serum-containing
but
physical
separation
of
serum
EVs
and
secreted
EVs
(e.g.
Bioreactor
flask)
EV-depleted
serum
condition
Control
condition
Control
condition
Control
condition
Control
condition
Control
condition
Control
condition
Control
condition
Control
condition
separation protocol
(d)(U)C
(d)(U)C
(d)(U)C
(d)(U)C
(d)(U)C
(d)(U)C
(d)(U)C
(d)(U)C
Exp. nr.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
EV-METRIC %
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66