Search > Results

You searched for: 2020 (Year of publication)

Showing 1 - 50 of 384

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
Details EV-TRACK code Experiment nr. Species Sample type Separation protocol First author Year EV-METRIC
EV200058 1/1 Homo sapiens Cell culture supernatant (d)(U)C
DG
Luis A Arteaga-Blanco 2020 100%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Luis A Arteaga-Blanco, Andrés Mojoli, Robson Q Monteiro, Vanessa Sandim, Rubem F S Menna-Barreto, Filipe Santos Pereira-Dutra, Patrícia T Bozza, Rafael de Oliveira Resende, Dumith Chequer Bou-Habib
Journal
PLoS One
Abstract
Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are small membrane-limited structures derived from outward budding of t (show more...)Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are small membrane-limited structures derived from outward budding of the plasma membrane or endosomal system that participate in cellular communication processes through the transport of bioactive molecules to recipient cells. To date, there are no published methodological works showing step-by-step the isolation, characterization and internalization of small EVs secreted by human primary macrophages derived from circulating monocytes (MDM-derived sEVs). Thus, here we aimed to provide an alternative protocol based on differential ultracentrifugation (dUC) to describe small EVs (sEVs) from these cells. Monocyte-derived macrophages were cultured in EV-free medium during 24, 48 or 72 h and, then, EVs were isolated from culture supernatants by (dUC). Macrophages secreted a large amount of sEVs in the first 24 h, with size ranging from 40-150 nm, peaking at 105 nm, as evaluated by nanoparticle tracking analysis and scanning electron microscopy. The markers Alix, CD63 and CD81 were detected by immunoblotting in EV samples, and the co-localization of CD63 and CD81 after sucrose density gradient ultracentrifugation (S-DGUC) indicated the presence of sEVs from late endosomal origin. Confocal fluorescence revealed that the sEVs were internalized by primary macrophages after three hours of co-culture. The methodology here applied aims to contribute for enhancing reproducibility between the limited number of available protocols for the isolation and characterization of MDM-derived sEVs, thus providing basic knowledge in the area of EV methods that can be useful for those investigators working with sEVs released by human primary macrophages derived from circulating monocytes. (hide)
EV-METRIC
100% (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
Cell culture supernatant
Sample origin
Control condition
Focus vesicles
Other / Small EVs
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
DG
Protein markers
EV: Alix/ CD81/ CD63/ beta actin
non-EV: Calnexin/ Cytochrome c
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.117- 1.181
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker/protocol adaptation for the isolation and characterization of MDM-derived small EVs
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
primary human macrophages derived from circulating monocytes
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
Commercial EDS
Cell viability (%)
91
Cell count
2,00E+06
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
70
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 41 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
130
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
10
Wash: time (min)
70
Wash: Rotor Type
SW 41 Ti
Wash: speed (g)
130 000
Density gradient
Only used for validation of main results
Yes
Type
Continuous
Lowest density fraction
10%
Highest density fraction
90%
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
11
Sample volume (mL)
0,2
Orientation
Bottom-up
Rotor type
SW 41 Ti
Speed (g)
200000
Duration (min)
960
Fraction volume (mL)
2
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
10
Pelleting: duration (min)
70
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 41 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
130
Pelleting-wash: volume per pellet (mL)
10
Pelleting-wash: duration (min)
70
Pelleting-wash: speed (g)
SW 41 Ti
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Lowry-based assay
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ beta actin/ Alix/ CD81
Not detected contaminants
Calnexin/ Cytochrome c
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Size range/distribution
Reported size (nm)
40-150
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Scanning-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
80
EV190105 1/2 Homo sapiens Cell culture supernatant DG
(d)(U)C
Emanuela Mensà 2020 100%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Emanuela Mensà, Michele Guescini, Angelica Giuliani, Maria Giulia Bacalini, Deborah Ramini, Giacomo Corleone, Manuela Ferracin, Gianluca Fulgenzi, Laura Graciotti, Francesco Prattichizzo, Leonardo Sorci, Michela Battistelli, Vladia Monsurrò, Anna Rita Bonfigli, Maurizio Cardelli, Rina Recchioni, Fiorella Marcheselli, Silvia Latini, Serena Maggio, Mirco Fanelli, Stefano Amatori, Gianluca Storci, Antonio Ceriello, Vilberto Stocchi, Maria De Luca, Luca Magnani, Maria Rita Rippo, Antonio Domenico Procopio, Claudia Sala, Iva Budimir, Cristian Bassi, Massimo Negrini, Paolo Garagnani, Claudio Franceschi, Jacopo Sabbatinelli, Massimiliano Bonafè, Fabiola Olivieri
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
The role of epigenetics in endothelial cell senescence is a cutting-edge topic in ageing research. H (show more...)The role of epigenetics in endothelial cell senescence is a cutting-edge topic in ageing research. However, little is known of the relative contribution to pro-senescence signal propagation provided by microRNAs shuttled by extracellular vesicles (EVs) released from senescent cells. Analysis of microRNA and DNA methylation profiles in non-senescent (control) and senescent (SEN) human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs), and microRNA profiling of their cognate small EVs (sEVs) and large EVs demonstrated that SEN cells released a significantly greater sEV number than control cells. sEVs were enriched in miR-21-5p and miR-217, which target DNMT1 and SIRT1. Treatment of control cells with SEN sEVs induced a miR-21/miR-217-related impairment of DNMT1-SIRT1 expression, the reduction of proliferation markers, the acquisition of a senescent phenotype and a partial demethylation of the locus encoding for miR-21. MicroRNA profiling of sEVs from plasma of healthy subjects aged 40–100 years showed an inverse U-shaped age-related trend for miR-21-5p, consistent with senescence-associated biomarker profiles. Our findings suggest that miR-21-5p/miR-217 carried by SEN sEVs spread pro-senescence signals, affecting DNA methylation and cell replication. (hide)
EV-METRIC
100% (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
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
DG
(d)(U)C
Protein markers
EV: TSG101/ Calnexin/ CD63
non-EV: Albumin
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.08-1.10
Show all info
Study aim
Function
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
Human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs)
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
Commercial EDS
Cell viability (%)
90
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
70
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 28
Pelleting: speed (g)
103745
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
3
Wash: time (min)
70
Wash: Rotor Type
Type 90 Ti
Wash: speed (g)
109354
Density gradient
Only used for validation of main results
Yes
Type
Discontinuous
Number of initial discontinuous layers
5
Lowest density fraction
5%
Highest density fraction
40%
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
12
Sample volume (mL)
0.5
Orientation
Bottom-up
Rotor type
SW 28
Speed (g)
103745
Duration (min)
960
Fraction volume (mL)
1
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
3.5
Pelleting: duration (min)
70
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 90 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
109354
Pelleting-wash: volume per pellet (mL)
3
Pelleting-wash: duration (min)
70
Pelleting-wash: speed (g)
Type 90 Ti
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
microBCA
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ TSG101/ Calnexin
Not detected contaminants
Albumin
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)(q)PCR
Database
No
Proteinase treatment
Yes
Moment of Proteinase treatment
After
Proteinase type
Proteinase K
Proteinase concentration
20
RNAse treatment
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Modus
Reported size (nm)
80 (sEVs) / 120 (lEVs)
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
Number of particles per cell: 3E4 (sEVs)/1.5E4 (lEVs)
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV190103 1/1 Homo sapiens Cell culture supernatant DG
(d)(U)C
Dynabeads CD9, CD63, CD81
Xiaoju Zhou 2020 100%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Xiaoju Zhou, Brooke A Brown, Amanda P Siegel, Mohamed El Masry, Xuyao Zeng, Woran Song, Amitava Das, Puneet Khandelwal, Andrew Clark, Kanhaiya Singh, Poornachander R Guda, Mahadeo Gorain, Lava Timsina, Yi Xuan, Stephen C Jacobson, Milos V Novotny, Sashwati Roy, Mangilal Agarwal, Robert J Lee, Chandan K Sen, David E Clemmer, Subhadip Ghatak
Journal
ACS Nano
Abstract
Bidirectional cell-cell communication involving exosome-borne cargo such as miRNA, has emerged as a (show more...)Bidirectional cell-cell communication involving exosome-borne cargo such as miRNA, has emerged as a critical mechanism for wound healing. Unlike other shedding vesicles, exosomes selectively package miRNA by SUMOylation of heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteinA2B1 (hnRNPA2B1). In this work, we elucidate the significance of exosome in keratinocyte-macrophage crosstalk following injury. Keratinocyte-derived exosomes were genetically labeled with GFP reporter (Exoκ-GFP) using tissue nanotransfection and were isolated from dorsal murine skin and wound-edge tissue by affinity selection using magnetic beads. Surface N-glycans of Exoκ-GFP were also characterized. Unlike skin exosome, wound-edge Exoκ-GFP demonstrated characteristic N-glycan ions with abundance of low base pair RNA and were selectively engulfed by wound-macrophages (ωmϕ) in granulation tissue. In vitro addition of wound-edge Exoκ-GFP to proinflammatory ωmϕ resulted in conversion to a proresolution phenotype. To selectively inhibit miRNA packaging within Exoκ-GFP in vivo, pH-responsive keratinocyte-targeted siRNA-hnRNPA2B1 functionalized lipid nanoparticles (TLNPκ) were designed with 94.3% encapsulation efficiency. Application of TLNPκ/si-hnRNPA2B1 to murine dorsal wound-edge significantly inhibited expression of hnRNPA2B1 by 80% in epidermis compared to TLNPκ/si-control group. Although no significant difference in wound closure or re-epithelialization was observed, TLNPκ/si-hnRNPA2B1 treated group showed significant increase in ωmϕ displaying proinflammatory markers in the granulation tissue at day 10 post-wounding compared to TLNPκ/si-control group. Furthermore, TLNPκ/si-hnRNPA2B1 treated mice showed impaired barrier function with diminished expression of epithelial junctional proteins, lending credence to the notion that unresolved inflammation results in leaky skin. This work provides insight wherein Exoκ-GFP are recognized as a major contributor that regulates macrophage trafficking and epithelial barrier properties post-injury. (hide)
EV-METRIC
100% (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
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
DG
(d)(U)C
Dynabeads CD9, CD63, CD81
Protein markers
EV: TSG101/ Alix
non-EV:
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.16
Show all info
Study aim
Function/Biogenesis/cargo sorting/Mechanism of uptake/transfer
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
HaCaT
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
Commercial EDS
Cell viability (%)
95
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Equal to or above 150,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
TLA-120.2
Pelleting: speed (g)
245000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
0.5
Wash: time (min)
120
Wash: Rotor Type
TLA-120.2
Wash: speed (g)
245000
Density gradient
Only used for validation of main results
Yes
Type
Discontinuous
Number of initial discontinuous layers
6
Lowest density fraction
0.4M
Highest density fraction
2.5M
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
1.05
Sample volume (mL)
0.05
Orientation
Top-down
Rotor type
TLA-120.2
Speed (g)
100000
Duration (min)
1080
Fraction volume (mL)
0.1
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
1
Pelleting: duration (min)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
TLA-120.2
Pelleting: speed (g)
245000
Commercial kit
Dynabeads CD9, CD63, CD81
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
microBCA
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
TSG101/ Alix/ FLOT1/ HSP90
Detected contaminants
Prohibitin
Not detected contaminants
GM130
Flow cytometry specific beads
Antibody details provided?
No
Detected EV-associated proteins
TSG101
Other 1
Fluorescent anisotropy
Detected EV-associated proteins
TSG101
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)(q)PCR
Database
No
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Modus
Reported size (nm)
102
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
Yes, as number of particles per milliliter of starting sample 3.20E+07
EM
EM-type
Scanning-EM
Image type
Wide-field
EV190097 1/2 Homo sapiens Synovial fluid (d)(U)C
SEC
Foers, Andrew 2020 100%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Andrew D Foers, Laura F Dagley, Simon Chatfield, Andrew I Webb, Lesley Cheng, Andrew F Hill, Ian P Wicks, Ken C Pang
Journal
Clinical & Translational Immunology
Abstract
Results: Synovial fluid EVs were present at higher concentrations in RA joints with high‐level inf (show more...)Results: Synovial fluid EVs were present at higher concentrations in RA joints with high‐level inflammation (P‐value = 0.004) but were smaller in diameter (P‐value = 0.03) than in low‐level inflammation. In total, 1058 SF EV proteins were identified by mass spectrometry analysis. Neutrophil and fibroblast markers were overrepresented in all disease groups. Numerous proteins with potential to modulate inflammatory and immunological processes were detected, including nine citrullinated peptides. Forty‐five and 135 EV‐associated proteins were significantly elevated in RA joints with high‐level inflammation than in RA joints with low‐level inflammation and OA joints, respectively. Gene ontology analysis revealed significant enrichment for proteins associated with ‘neutrophil degranulation’ within SF EVs from RA joints with high‐level inflammation. Conclusion: Our results provide new information about SF EVs and insight into how EVs might contribute to the perpetuation of RA. (hide)
EV-METRIC
100% (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
Synovial fluid
Sample origin
Inflamed rheumatoid arthritis joints
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
SEC
Protein markers
EV:
non-EV:
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Synovial fluid
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 50,000 g and 100,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
90
Pelleting: rotor type
TLA-45
Pelleting: speed (g)
58100
Size-exclusion chromatography
Total column volume (mL)
320
Sample volume/column (mL)
5
Resin type
Sephacryl S-500 HR
Characterization: Protein analysis
PMID previous EV protein analysis
PMID: 29963299
Protein Concentration Method
BCA
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV190097 2/2 Homo sapiens Synovial fluid (d)(U)C
SEC
Foers, Andrew 2020 100%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Andrew D Foers, Laura F Dagley, Simon Chatfield, Andrew I Webb, Lesley Cheng, Andrew F Hill, Ian P Wicks, Ken C Pang
Journal
Clinical & Translational Immunology
Abstract
Results: Synovial fluid EVs were present at higher concentrations in RA joints with high‐level inf (show more...)Results: Synovial fluid EVs were present at higher concentrations in RA joints with high‐level inflammation (P‐value = 0.004) but were smaller in diameter (P‐value = 0.03) than in low‐level inflammation. In total, 1058 SF EV proteins were identified by mass spectrometry analysis. Neutrophil and fibroblast markers were overrepresented in all disease groups. Numerous proteins with potential to modulate inflammatory and immunological processes were detected, including nine citrullinated peptides. Forty‐five and 135 EV‐associated proteins were significantly elevated in RA joints with high‐level inflammation than in RA joints with low‐level inflammation and OA joints, respectively. Gene ontology analysis revealed significant enrichment for proteins associated with ‘neutrophil degranulation’ within SF EVs from RA joints with high‐level inflammation. Conclusion: Our results provide new information about SF EVs and insight into how EVs might contribute to the perpetuation of RA. (hide)
EV-METRIC
100% (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
Synovial fluid
Sample origin
Non-inflamed rheumatoid arthritis joints
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
SEC
Protein markers
EV:
non-EV:
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Synovial fluid
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 50,000 g and 100,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
90
Pelleting: rotor type
TLA-45
Pelleting: speed (g)
58100
Size-exclusion chromatography
Total column volume (mL)
320
Sample volume/column (mL)
5
Resin type
Sephacryl S-500 HR
Characterization: Protein analysis
PMID previous EV protein analysis
PMID: 29963299
Protein Concentration Method
BCA
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
210
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV190064 5/10 Homo sapiens Urine DG
(d)(U)C
UF
Dhondt B 2020 100%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Dhondt B, Geeurickx E, Tulkens J, Van Deun J, Vergauwen G, Lippens L, Miinalainen I, Rappu P, Heino J, Ost P, Lumen N, De Wever O, Hendrix A.
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Extracellular vesicles (EV) are increasingly being recognized as important vehicles of intercellular (show more...)Extracellular vesicles (EV) are increasingly being recognized as important vehicles of intercellular communication and promising diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in cancer. Despite this enormous clinical potential, the plethora of methods to separate EV from biofluids, providing material of highly variable purity, and lacking knowledge regarding methodological repeatability pose a barrier to clinical translation. Urine is considered an ideal proximal fluid for the study of EV in urological cancers due to its direct contact with the urogenital system. We demonstrate that density-based fractionation of urine by bottom-up Optiprep density gradient centrifugation separates EV and soluble proteins with high specificity and repeatability. Mass spectrometry-based proteomic analysis of urinary EV (uEV) in men with benign and malignant prostate disease allowed us to significantly expand the known human uEV proteome with high specificity and identifies a unique biological profile in prostate cancer not uncovered by the analysis of soluble proteins. In addition, profiling the proteome of EV separated from prostate tumour conditioned medium and matched uEV confirms the specificity of the identified uEV proteome for prostate cancer. Finally, a comparative proteomic analysis with uEV from patients with bladder and renal cancer provided additional evidence of the selective enrichment of protein signatures in uEV reflecting their respective cancer tissues of origin. In conclusion, this study identifies hundreds of previously undetected proteins in uEV of prostate cancer patients and provides a powerful toolbox to map uEV content and contaminants ultimately allowing biomarker discovery in urological cancers. (hide)
EV-METRIC
100% (98th 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
DG
(d)(U)C
UF
Protein markers
EV: TSG101/ Alix/ Flotillin1/ CD9
non-EV: Tamm-Horsfall protein
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.087-1.109
Show all info
Study aim
Function/New methodological development/Biomarker/Identification of content (omics approaches)/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
Density gradient
Type
Discontinuous
Number of initial discontinuous layers
4
Lowest density fraction
5%
Highest density fraction
40%
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
16.5
Sample volume (mL)
1
Orientation
Top-down
Rotor type
SW 32.1 Ti
Speed (g)
100000
Duration (min)
1080
Fraction volume (mL)
1
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
16
Pelleting: duration (min)
180
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 32.1 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Ultra filtration
Cut-off size (kDa)
10
Membrane type
Regenerated cellulose
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Fluorometric assay (e.g. Qubit, NanoOrange,...)
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
Flotillin1/ CD9/ TSG101/ Alix
Detected contaminants
Tamm-Horsfall protein
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
196.5
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
30-150
EV190064 6/10 Homo sapiens Urine DG
(d)(U)C
UF
Dhondt B 2020 100%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Dhondt B, Geeurickx E, Tulkens J, Van Deun J, Vergauwen G, Lippens L, Miinalainen I, Rappu P, Heino J, Ost P, Lumen N, De Wever O, Hendrix A.
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Extracellular vesicles (EV) are increasingly being recognized as important vehicles of intercellular (show more...)Extracellular vesicles (EV) are increasingly being recognized as important vehicles of intercellular communication and promising diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in cancer. Despite this enormous clinical potential, the plethora of methods to separate EV from biofluids, providing material of highly variable purity, and lacking knowledge regarding methodological repeatability pose a barrier to clinical translation. Urine is considered an ideal proximal fluid for the study of EV in urological cancers due to its direct contact with the urogenital system. We demonstrate that density-based fractionation of urine by bottom-up Optiprep density gradient centrifugation separates EV and soluble proteins with high specificity and repeatability. Mass spectrometry-based proteomic analysis of urinary EV (uEV) in men with benign and malignant prostate disease allowed us to significantly expand the known human uEV proteome with high specificity and identifies a unique biological profile in prostate cancer not uncovered by the analysis of soluble proteins. In addition, profiling the proteome of EV separated from prostate tumour conditioned medium and matched uEV confirms the specificity of the identified uEV proteome for prostate cancer. Finally, a comparative proteomic analysis with uEV from patients with bladder and renal cancer provided additional evidence of the selective enrichment of protein signatures in uEV reflecting their respective cancer tissues of origin. In conclusion, this study identifies hundreds of previously undetected proteins in uEV of prostate cancer patients and provides a powerful toolbox to map uEV content and contaminants ultimately allowing biomarker discovery in urological cancers. (hide)
EV-METRIC
100% (98th 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
DG
(d)(U)C
UF
Protein markers
EV: TSG101/ Alix/ Flotillin1/ CD9
non-EV: Tamm-Horsfall protein
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.087-1.109
Show all info
Study aim
Function/New methodological development/Biomarker/Identification of content (omics approaches)/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
Density gradient
Type
Discontinuous
Number of initial discontinuous layers
4
Lowest density fraction
5%
Highest density fraction
40%
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
16.5
Sample volume (mL)
0.8
Orientation
Bottom-up
Rotor type
SW 32.1 Ti
Speed (g)
100000
Duration (min)
1080
Fraction volume (mL)
1
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
16
Pelleting: duration (min)
180
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 32.1 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Ultra filtration
Cut-off size (kDa)
10
Membrane type
Regenerated cellulose
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Fluorometric assay (e.g. Qubit, NanoOrange,...)
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
Flotillin1/ CD9/ TSG101/ Alix
Detected contaminants
Tamm-Horsfall protein
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
131.7
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
30-150
EV190064 7/10 Homo sapiens Urine DG
(d)(U)C
UF
Dhondt B 2020 100%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Dhondt B, Geeurickx E, Tulkens J, Van Deun J, Vergauwen G, Lippens L, Miinalainen I, Rappu P, Heino J, Ost P, Lumen N, De Wever O, Hendrix A.
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Extracellular vesicles (EV) are increasingly being recognized as important vehicles of intercellular (show more...)Extracellular vesicles (EV) are increasingly being recognized as important vehicles of intercellular communication and promising diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in cancer. Despite this enormous clinical potential, the plethora of methods to separate EV from biofluids, providing material of highly variable purity, and lacking knowledge regarding methodological repeatability pose a barrier to clinical translation. Urine is considered an ideal proximal fluid for the study of EV in urological cancers due to its direct contact with the urogenital system. We demonstrate that density-based fractionation of urine by bottom-up Optiprep density gradient centrifugation separates EV and soluble proteins with high specificity and repeatability. Mass spectrometry-based proteomic analysis of urinary EV (uEV) in men with benign and malignant prostate disease allowed us to significantly expand the known human uEV proteome with high specificity and identifies a unique biological profile in prostate cancer not uncovered by the analysis of soluble proteins. In addition, profiling the proteome of EV separated from prostate tumour conditioned medium and matched uEV confirms the specificity of the identified uEV proteome for prostate cancer. Finally, a comparative proteomic analysis with uEV from patients with bladder and renal cancer provided additional evidence of the selective enrichment of protein signatures in uEV reflecting their respective cancer tissues of origin. In conclusion, this study identifies hundreds of previously undetected proteins in uEV of prostate cancer patients and provides a powerful toolbox to map uEV content and contaminants ultimately allowing biomarker discovery in urological cancers. (hide)
EV-METRIC
100% (98th 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
Prostate Cancer
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
DG
(d)(U)C
UF
Protein markers
EV: Alix/ TSG101/ Flotillin1/ CD9/ Syntenin-1
non-EV: Tamm-Horsfall protein
Proteomics
yes
EV density (g/ml)
1.087-1.109
Show all info
Study aim
Function/New methodological development/Biomarker/Identification of content (omics approaches)/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
Density gradient
Type
Discontinuous
Number of initial discontinuous layers
4
Lowest density fraction
5%
Highest density fraction
40%
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
16.5
Sample volume (mL)
0.8
Orientation
Bottom-up
Rotor type
SW 32.1 Ti
Speed (g)
100000
Duration (min)
1080
Fraction volume (mL)
1
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
16
Pelleting: duration (min)
180
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 32.1 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Ultra filtration
Cut-off size (kDa)
10
Membrane type
Regenerated cellulose
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Fluorometric assay (e.g. Qubit, NanoOrange,...)
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
Flotillin1/ Alix/ Syntenin-1/ TSG101/ CD9
Detected contaminants
Tamm-Horsfall protein
Proteomics database
Yes:
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Size range/distribution
Reported size (nm)
100-200
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
30-150
EV190064 8/10 Homo sapiens Urine DG
(d)(U)C
UF
Dhondt B 2020 100%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Dhondt B, Geeurickx E, Tulkens J, Van Deun J, Vergauwen G, Lippens L, Miinalainen I, Rappu P, Heino J, Ost P, Lumen N, De Wever O, Hendrix A.
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Extracellular vesicles (EV) are increasingly being recognized as important vehicles of intercellular (show more...)Extracellular vesicles (EV) are increasingly being recognized as important vehicles of intercellular communication and promising diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in cancer. Despite this enormous clinical potential, the plethora of methods to separate EV from biofluids, providing material of highly variable purity, and lacking knowledge regarding methodological repeatability pose a barrier to clinical translation. Urine is considered an ideal proximal fluid for the study of EV in urological cancers due to its direct contact with the urogenital system. We demonstrate that density-based fractionation of urine by bottom-up Optiprep density gradient centrifugation separates EV and soluble proteins with high specificity and repeatability. Mass spectrometry-based proteomic analysis of urinary EV (uEV) in men with benign and malignant prostate disease allowed us to significantly expand the known human uEV proteome with high specificity and identifies a unique biological profile in prostate cancer not uncovered by the analysis of soluble proteins. In addition, profiling the proteome of EV separated from prostate tumour conditioned medium and matched uEV confirms the specificity of the identified uEV proteome for prostate cancer. Finally, a comparative proteomic analysis with uEV from patients with bladder and renal cancer provided additional evidence of the selective enrichment of protein signatures in uEV reflecting their respective cancer tissues of origin. In conclusion, this study identifies hundreds of previously undetected proteins in uEV of prostate cancer patients and provides a powerful toolbox to map uEV content and contaminants ultimately allowing biomarker discovery in urological cancers. (hide)
EV-METRIC
100% (98th 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
Bladder Cancer
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
DG
(d)(U)C
UF
Protein markers
EV: Alix/ Flotillin1/ CD9/ Syntenin-1
non-EV: Tamm-Horsfall protein
Proteomics
yes
EV density (g/ml)
1.087-1.109
Show all info
Study aim
Function/New methodological development/Biomarker/Identification of content (omics approaches)/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
Density gradient
Type
Discontinuous
Number of initial discontinuous layers
4
Lowest density fraction
5%
Highest density fraction
40%
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
16.5
Sample volume (mL)
0.8
Orientation
Bottom-up
Rotor type
SW 32.1 Ti
Speed (g)
100000
Duration (min)
1080
Fraction volume (mL)
1
Fraction processing
Size-exclusion chromatography
Ultra filtration
Cut-off size (kDa)
10
Membrane type
Regenerated cellulose
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Fluorometric assay (e.g. Qubit, NanoOrange,...)
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
Flotillin1/ Alix/ Syntenin-1/ CD9
Detected contaminants
Tamm-Horsfall protein
Proteomics database
Yes:
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Size range/distribution
Reported size (nm)
100-200
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
30-150
EV190064 9/10 Homo sapiens Urine DG
(d)(U)C
UF
Dhondt B 2020 100%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Dhondt B, Geeurickx E, Tulkens J, Van Deun J, Vergauwen G, Lippens L, Miinalainen I, Rappu P, Heino J, Ost P, Lumen N, De Wever O, Hendrix A.
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Extracellular vesicles (EV) are increasingly being recognized as important vehicles of intercellular (show more...)Extracellular vesicles (EV) are increasingly being recognized as important vehicles of intercellular communication and promising diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in cancer. Despite this enormous clinical potential, the plethora of methods to separate EV from biofluids, providing material of highly variable purity, and lacking knowledge regarding methodological repeatability pose a barrier to clinical translation. Urine is considered an ideal proximal fluid for the study of EV in urological cancers due to its direct contact with the urogenital system. We demonstrate that density-based fractionation of urine by bottom-up Optiprep density gradient centrifugation separates EV and soluble proteins with high specificity and repeatability. Mass spectrometry-based proteomic analysis of urinary EV (uEV) in men with benign and malignant prostate disease allowed us to significantly expand the known human uEV proteome with high specificity and identifies a unique biological profile in prostate cancer not uncovered by the analysis of soluble proteins. In addition, profiling the proteome of EV separated from prostate tumour conditioned medium and matched uEV confirms the specificity of the identified uEV proteome for prostate cancer. Finally, a comparative proteomic analysis with uEV from patients with bladder and renal cancer provided additional evidence of the selective enrichment of protein signatures in uEV reflecting their respective cancer tissues of origin. In conclusion, this study identifies hundreds of previously undetected proteins in uEV of prostate cancer patients and provides a powerful toolbox to map uEV content and contaminants ultimately allowing biomarker discovery in urological cancers. (hide)
EV-METRIC
100% (98th 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
Renal Cancer
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
DG
(d)(U)C
UF
Protein markers
EV: Alix/ TSG101/ Flotillin1/ CD9/ Syntenin-1
non-EV: Tamm-Horsfall protein
Proteomics
yes
EV density (g/ml)
1.087-1.109
Show all info
Study aim
Function/New methodological development/Biomarker/Identification of content (omics approaches)/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
Density gradient
Type
Discontinuous
Number of initial discontinuous layers
4
Lowest density fraction
5%
Highest density fraction
40%
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
16.5
Sample volume (mL)
0.8
Orientation
Bottom-up
Rotor type
SW 32.1 Ti
Speed (g)
100000
Duration (min)
1080
Fraction volume (mL)
1
Fraction processing
Size-exclusion chromatography
Ultra filtration
Cut-off size (kDa)
10
Membrane type
Regenerated cellulose
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Fluorometric assay (e.g. Qubit, NanoOrange,...)
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
Flotillin1/ Alix/ Syntenin-1/ TSG101/ CD9
Detected contaminants
Tamm-Horsfall protein
Proteomics database
Yes:
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Size range/distribution
Reported size (nm)
100-300
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
30-150
EV190064 10/10 Homo sapiens Tissue DG
(d)(U)C
UF
Dhondt B 2020 100%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Dhondt B, Geeurickx E, Tulkens J, Van Deun J, Vergauwen G, Lippens L, Miinalainen I, Rappu P, Heino J, Ost P, Lumen N, De Wever O, Hendrix A.
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Extracellular vesicles (EV) are increasingly being recognized as important vehicles of intercellular (show more...)Extracellular vesicles (EV) are increasingly being recognized as important vehicles of intercellular communication and promising diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in cancer. Despite this enormous clinical potential, the plethora of methods to separate EV from biofluids, providing material of highly variable purity, and lacking knowledge regarding methodological repeatability pose a barrier to clinical translation. Urine is considered an ideal proximal fluid for the study of EV in urological cancers due to its direct contact with the urogenital system. We demonstrate that density-based fractionation of urine by bottom-up Optiprep density gradient centrifugation separates EV and soluble proteins with high specificity and repeatability. Mass spectrometry-based proteomic analysis of urinary EV (uEV) in men with benign and malignant prostate disease allowed us to significantly expand the known human uEV proteome with high specificity and identifies a unique biological profile in prostate cancer not uncovered by the analysis of soluble proteins. In addition, profiling the proteome of EV separated from prostate tumour conditioned medium and matched uEV confirms the specificity of the identified uEV proteome for prostate cancer. Finally, a comparative proteomic analysis with uEV from patients with bladder and renal cancer provided additional evidence of the selective enrichment of protein signatures in uEV reflecting their respective cancer tissues of origin. In conclusion, this study identifies hundreds of previously undetected proteins in uEV of prostate cancer patients and provides a powerful toolbox to map uEV content and contaminants ultimately allowing biomarker discovery in urological cancers. (hide)
EV-METRIC
100% (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
Tissue
Sample origin
Prostate Cancer
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
DG
(d)(U)C
UF
Protein markers
EV: Alix/ TSG101/ Flotillin1/ CD9/ Syntenin-1
non-EV: Tamm-Horsfall protein
Proteomics
yes
EV density (g/ml)
1.087-1.109
Show all info
Study aim
Function/New methodological development/Biomarker/Identification of content (omics approaches)/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Tissue
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Density gradient
Type
Discontinuous
Number of initial discontinuous layers
4
Lowest density fraction
5%
Highest density fraction
40%
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
16.5
Sample volume (mL)
0.8
Orientation
Bottom-up
Rotor type
SW 32.1 Ti
Speed (g)
100000
Duration (min)
1080
Fraction volume (mL)
1
Fraction processing
Size-exclusion chromatography
Ultra filtration
Cut-off size (kDa)
10
Membrane type
Regenerated cellulose
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Fluorometric assay (e.g. Qubit, NanoOrange,...)
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
Flotillin1/ Alix/ Syntenin-1/ TSG101/ CD9
Detected contaminants
Tamm-Horsfall protein
Proteomics database
Yes
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
150.3
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
30-150
EV190044 11/11 Homo sapiens Blood plasma DG
(d)(U)C
qEV
Driedonks, Tom A.P. 2020 100%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Tom A.P. Driedonks, Sanne Mol, Sanne de Bruin, Anna-Linda Peters, Xiaogang Zhang, Marthe F.S. Lindenbergh, Boukje M. Beuger, Anne-Marieke D. van Stalborch, Thom Spaan, Esther C. de Jong, Erhard van der Vries, Coert Margadant, Robin van Bruggen, Alexander P.J. Vlaar, Tom Groot Kormelink, and Esther N.M. Nolte-‘T Hoen
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Major efforts are made to characterize the presence of microRNA (miRNA) and messenger RNA in blood p (show more...)Major efforts are made to characterize the presence of microRNA (miRNA) and messenger RNA in blood plasma to discover novel disease-associated biomarkers. MiRNAs in plasma are associated to several types of macromolecular structures, including extracellular vesicles (EV), lipoprotein particles (LPP) and ribonucleoprotein particles (RNP). RNAs in these complexes are recovered at variable efficiency by commonly used EV- and RNA isolation methods, which causes biases and inconsistencies in miRNA quantitation. Besides miRNAs, various other non-coding RNA species are contained in EV and present within the pool of plasma extracellular RNA. Members of the Y-RNA family have been detected in EV from various cell types and are among the most abundant non-coding RNA types in plasma. We previously showed that shuttling of full-length Y-RNA into EV released by immune cells is modulated by microbial stimulation. This indicated that Y-RNAs could contribute to the functional properties of EV in immune cell communication and that EV-associated Y-RNAs could have biomarker potential in immune-related diseases. Here, we investigated which macromolecular structures in plasma contain full length Y-RNA and whether the levels of three Y-RNA subtypes in plasma (Y1, Y3 and Y4) change during systemic inflammation. Our data indicate that the majority of full length Y-RNA in plasma is stably associated to EV. Moreover, we discovered that EV from different blood-related cell types contain cell-type-specific Y-RNA subtype ratios. Using a human model for systemic inflammation, we show that the neutrophil-specific Y4/Y3 ratios and PBMC-specific Y3/Y1 ratios were significantly altered after induction of inflammation. The plasma Y-RNA ratios strongly correlated with the number and type of immune cells during systemic inflammation. Cell-type-specific “Y-RNA signatures” in plasma EV can be determined without prior enrichment for EV, and may be further explored as simple and fast test for diagnosis of inflammatory responses or other immune-related diseases. (hide)
EV-METRIC
100% (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
Blood plasma
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
DG
(d)(U)C
qEV
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ CD63/ Flotillin1/ CD9
non-EV: ApoAl/ ApoB100
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.11 - 1.18
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker/Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Blood plasma
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
65
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 40 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Density gradient
Type
Continuous
Lowest density fraction
0.4 M
Highest density fraction
2.5 M
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
12
Sample volume (mL)
0.05
Orientation
Bottom-up
Rotor type
SW 40 Ti
Speed (g)
192000
Duration (min)
900
Fraction volume (mL)
1
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
4
Pelleting: duration (min)
65
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 40 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
192000
Commercial kit
qEV
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
Flotillin1/ CD9/ CD63/ CD81
Not detected contaminants
ApoAl/ ApoB100
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)(q)PCR
Database
No
Proteinase treatment
Yes
Moment of Proteinase treatment
After
Proteinase type
Proteinase K
Proteinase concentration
0.045
RNAse treatment
Yes
Moment of RNAse treatment
After
RNAse type
RNase A
RNAse concentration
0.16
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
130
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV190006 1/2 Homo sapiens Cell culture supernatant DG
(d)(U)C
Altei, Wanessa F. 2020 100%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Wanessa F Altei, Bianca C Pachane, Patty K Dos Santos, Lígia N M Ribeiro, Bong Hwan Sung, Alissa M Weaver, Heloisa S Selistre-de-Araújo
Journal
Cell Commun Signal
Abstract
Background: Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are lipid-bound particles that are naturally released from (show more...)Background: Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are lipid-bound particles that are naturally released from cells and mediate cell-cell communication. Integrin adhesion receptors are enriched in small EVs (SEVs) and SEV-carried integrins have been shown to promote cancer cell migration and to mediate organ-specific metastasis; however, how integrins mediate these effects is not entirely clear and could represent a combination of EV binding to extracellular matrix and cells. Methods: To probe integrin role in EVs binding and uptake, we employed a disintegrin inhibitor (DisBa-01) of integrin binding with specificity for αvβ3 integrin. EVs were purified from MDA-MB-231 cells conditioned media by serial centrifugation method. Isolated EVs were characterized by different techniques and further employed in adhesion, uptake and co-culture experiments. Results: We find that SEVs secreted from MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells carry αvβ3 integrin and bind directly to fibronectin-coated plates, which is inhibited by DisBa-01. SEV coating on tissue culture plates also induces adhesion of MDA-MB-231 cells, which is inhibited by DisBa-01 treatment. Analysis of EV uptake and interchange between cells reveals that the amount of CD63-positive EVs delivered from malignant MDA-MB-231 breast cells to non-malignant MCF10A breast epithelial cells is reduced by DisBa-01 treatment. Inhibition of αvβ3 integrin decreases CD63 expression in cancer cells suggesting an effect on SEV content. Conclusion: In summary, our findings demonstrate for the first time a key role of αvβ3 integrin in cell-cell communication through SEVs. (hide)
EV-METRIC
100% (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
Cell culture supernatant
Sample origin
immortalized
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
Protein markers
EV: Flotillin1/ CD63/ Alix/ integrin-alpha5/ integrin-alpha2/ integrin-alphaV/ integrin-beta1/ integrin-beta3/ FN1/ COL1
non-EV: Calnexin
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.11
Show all info
Study aim
Biogenesis/cargo sorting/Mechanism of uptake/transfer
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
MDAMB231
EV-harvesting Medium
Serum free medium
Cell viability (%)
95
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
4
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 32 Ti
Pelleting: 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)
12
Sample volume (mL)
3
Orientation
Bottom-up
Rotor type
Type 40
Speed (g)
100000
Duration (min)
18
Fraction volume (mL)
1
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
1
Pelleting: duration (min)
180
Pelleting: rotor type
TLA-100.3
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Pelleting-wash: volume per pellet (mL)
3
Pelleting-wash: duration (min)
180
Pelleting-wash: speed (g)
TLA-100.3
Density cushion
Density medium
EV-subtype
Distinction between multiple subtypes
Used subtypes
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
microBCA
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
No
Detected EV-associated proteins
Flotillin1/ CD63/ Alix/ integrin-alpha5/ integrin-alpha2/ integrin-alphaV/ integrin-beta1/ integrin-beta3/ FN1/ COL1
Not detected EV-associated proteins
Not detected contaminants
Calnexin
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Median
Reported size (nm)
107
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
Yes, as number of particles per million cells 5.50E+08
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
EV200031 4/8 Homo sapiens Blood plasma DG
(d)(U)C
Grossi, Ilaria 2020 89%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Ilaria Grossi, Annalisa Radeghieri, Lucia Paolini, Vanessa Porrini, Andrea Pilotto, Alessandro Padovani, Alessandra Marengoni, Alessandro Barbon, Arianna Bellucci, Marina Pizzi, Alessandro Salvi, Giuseppina De Petro
Journal
Int J Mol Med
Abstract
Parkinson's disease (PD) is an important disabling age‑related disorder and is the second most com (show more...)Parkinson's disease (PD) is an important disabling age‑related disorder and is the second most common neurodegenerative disease. Currently, no established molecular biomarkers exist for the early diagnosis of PD. Circulating microRNAs (miRNAs), either vesicle‑free or encapsulated in extracellular vesicles (EVs), have emerged as potential blood‑based biomarkers also for neurodegenerative diseases. In this exploratory study, we focused on miR‑34a‑5p because of its well‑documented involvement in neurobiology. To explore a differential profile of circulating miR‑34a‑5p in PD, PD patients and age‑matched control subjects were enrolled. Serial ultracentrifugation steps and density gradient were used to separate EV subpopulations from plasma according to their different sedimentation properties (Large, Medium, Small EVs). Characterization of EV types was performed using western blotting and atomic force microscopy (AFM); purity from protein contaminants was checked with the colorimetric nanoplasmonic assay. Circulating miR‑34a‑5p levels were evaluated using qPCR in plasma and in each EV type. miR‑34a‑5p was significantly up‑regulated in small EVs devoid of exogenous protein contaminants (pure SEVs) from PD patients and ROC analysis indicated a good diagnostic performance in discriminating patients from controls (AUC=0.74, P<0.05). Moreover, miR‑34a‑5p levels in pure SEVs were associated with disease duration, Hoehn and Yahr and Beck Depression Inventory scores. These results underline the necessity to examine the miRNA content of each EV subpopulation to identify miRNA candidates with potential diagnostic value and lay the basis for future studies to validate the overexpression of circulating miR‑34a‑5p in PD via the use of pure SEVs. (hide)
EV-METRIC
89% (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
Blood plasma
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
DG
(d)(U)C
Protein markers
EV: TSG101/ CD63/ CD81/ Alix/ Annexin-V/ Flotillin1/ Adam-10/ Actinin-4
non-EV: Apo-AI/ GM130
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.09-1.22
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Blood plasma
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
TLA-55
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
1
Wash: time (min)
120
Wash: Rotor Type
TLA-55
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Density gradient
Type
Discontinuous
Number of initial discontinuous layers
7
Lowest density fraction
15%
Highest density fraction
70%
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
4.4
Sample volume (mL)
1
Orientation
Top-down
Rotor type
MLS-50
Speed (g)
100000
Duration (min)
960
Fraction volume (mL)
0.4
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
1
Pelleting: duration (min)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
TLA-55
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Bradford
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
Flotillin1/ CD63/ Adam-10/ Actinin-4/ Annexin-V/ TSG101/ Alix/ CD81
Not detected contaminants
Apo-AI/ GM130
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)(q)PCR;Capillary electrophoresis (e.g. Bioanalyzer)
Database
No
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
Yes
Moment of RNAse treatment
After
RNAse type
RNase H
RNAse concentration
0.00625
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
EM
EM-type
Atomic force microscopy
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
50-100
Report type
Not Reported
EV200031 8/8 Homo sapiens Blood plasma DG
(d)(U)C
Grossi, Ilaria 2020 89%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Ilaria Grossi, Annalisa Radeghieri, Lucia Paolini, Vanessa Porrini, Andrea Pilotto, Alessandro Padovani, Alessandra Marengoni, Alessandro Barbon, Arianna Bellucci, Marina Pizzi, Alessandro Salvi, Giuseppina De Petro
Journal
Int J Mol Med
Abstract
Parkinson's disease (PD) is an important disabling age‑related disorder and is the second most com (show more...)Parkinson's disease (PD) is an important disabling age‑related disorder and is the second most common neurodegenerative disease. Currently, no established molecular biomarkers exist for the early diagnosis of PD. Circulating microRNAs (miRNAs), either vesicle‑free or encapsulated in extracellular vesicles (EVs), have emerged as potential blood‑based biomarkers also for neurodegenerative diseases. In this exploratory study, we focused on miR‑34a‑5p because of its well‑documented involvement in neurobiology. To explore a differential profile of circulating miR‑34a‑5p in PD, PD patients and age‑matched control subjects were enrolled. Serial ultracentrifugation steps and density gradient were used to separate EV subpopulations from plasma according to their different sedimentation properties (Large, Medium, Small EVs). Characterization of EV types was performed using western blotting and atomic force microscopy (AFM); purity from protein contaminants was checked with the colorimetric nanoplasmonic assay. Circulating miR‑34a‑5p levels were evaluated using qPCR in plasma and in each EV type. miR‑34a‑5p was significantly up‑regulated in small EVs devoid of exogenous protein contaminants (pure SEVs) from PD patients and ROC analysis indicated a good diagnostic performance in discriminating patients from controls (AUC=0.74, P<0.05). Moreover, miR‑34a‑5p levels in pure SEVs were associated with disease duration, Hoehn and Yahr and Beck Depression Inventory scores. These results underline the necessity to examine the miRNA content of each EV subpopulation to identify miRNA candidates with potential diagnostic value and lay the basis for future studies to validate the overexpression of circulating miR‑34a‑5p in PD via the use of pure SEVs. (hide)
EV-METRIC
89% (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
Blood plasma
Sample origin
Parkinson's disease
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
DG
(d)(U)C
Protein markers
EV: TSG101/ CD63/ CD81/ Alix/ Annexin-V/ Flotillin1/ Adam-10/ Actinin-4
non-EV: Apo-AI/ GM130
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.09-1.22
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Blood plasma
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
TLA-55
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
1
Wash: time (min)
120
Wash: Rotor Type
TLA-55
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Density gradient
Type
Discontinuous
Number of initial discontinuous layers
7
Lowest density fraction
15%
Highest density fraction
70%
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
4.4
Sample volume (mL)
1
Orientation
Top-down
Rotor type
MLS-50
Speed (g)
100000
Duration (min)
960
Fraction volume (mL)
0.4
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
1
Pelleting: duration (min)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
TLA-55
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Bradford
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
Flotillin1/ CD63/ Adam-10/ Actinin-4/ Annexin-V/ TSG101/ Alix/ CD81
Not detected contaminants
Apo-AI/ GM130
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)(q)PCR;Capillary electrophoresis (e.g. Bioanalyzer)
Database
No
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
Yes
Moment of RNAse treatment
After
RNAse type
RNase H
RNAse concentration
0.00625
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
EM
EM-type
Atomic force microscopy
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
50-100
Report type
Not Reported
EV200015 1/4 Homo sapiens Cell culture supernatant DG
(d)(U)C
Filtration
Streck, Nicholas 2020 89%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Nicholas T Streck, Yuanjun Zhao, Jeffrey M Sundstrom, Nicholas J Buchkovich
Journal
J Virol
Abstract
Human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) manipulates cellular processes associated with secretory pathways withi (show more...)Human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) manipulates cellular processes associated with secretory pathways within an infected cell to facilitate efficient viral replication. However, little is known about how HCMV infection alters the surrounding cellular environment to promote virus spread to uninfected cells. Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are key signaling molecules that are commonly altered in numerous disease states. Previous reports have shown that viruses commonly alter EVs, which can significantly impact infection. This study finds that HCMV modulates EV biogenesis machinery through upregulation of the endosomal sorting complex required for transport (ESCRT) proteins. This regulation appears to increase the activity of EV biogenesis, since HCMV-infected fibroblasts have increased vesicle release and altered vesicle size compared to EVs from uninfected cells. EVs generated through ESCRT-independent pathways are also beneficial to virus spread in fibroblasts, as treatment with the EV inhibitor GW4869 slowed the efficiency of HCMV spread. Importantly, the transfer of EVs purified from HCMV-infected cells enhanced virus spread. This suggests that HCMV modulates the EV pathway to transfer proviral signals to uninfected cells that prime the cellular environment for incoming infection and enhance the efficiency of virus spread.IMPORTANCE Human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) is a herpesvirus that leads to serious health consequences in neonatal or immunocompromised patients. Clinical management of infection in these at-risk groups remains a serious concern even with approved antiviral therapies available. It is necessary to increase our understanding of the cellular changes that occur during infection and their importance to virus spread. This may help to identify new targets during infection that will lead to the development of novel treatment strategies. Extracellular vesicles (EVs) represent an important method of intercellular communication in the human host. This study finds that HCMV manipulates this pathway to increase the efficiency of virus spread to uninfected cells. This finding defines a new layer of host manipulation induced by HCMV infection that leads to enhanced virus spread. (hide)
EV-METRIC
89% (98th 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
DG
(d)(U)C
Filtration
Protein markers
EV: TSG101/ CD81/ CD63
non-EV: Tubulin
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
Density not calculated
Show all info
Study aim
Function/Biogenesis/cargo sorting
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
primary human dermal fibroblasts
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 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 32 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
130000
Density gradient
Type
Discontinuous
Number of initial discontinuous layers
6
Lowest density fraction
5%
Highest density fraction
41%
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
5
Sample volume (mL)
1
Orientation
Bottom-up
Rotor type
SW 55 Ti
Speed (g)
130000
Duration (min)
960
Fraction volume (mL)
0.5
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
5
Pelleting: duration (min)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 55 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
130000
Filtration steps
0.45µm > x > 0.22µm,
Characterization: Protein analysis
PMID previous EV protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ TSG101/ CD81
Not detected contaminants
Tubulin
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
PMID previous EV particle analysis
Extra particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
170
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
Yes, as number of particles per milliliter of starting sample 1.01E+10
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report type
Not Reported
EV-concentration
No
EV200015 2/4 Homo sapiens Cell culture supernatant DG
(d)(U)C
Filtration
Streck, Nicholas 2020 89%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Nicholas T Streck, Yuanjun Zhao, Jeffrey M Sundstrom, Nicholas J Buchkovich
Journal
J Virol
Abstract
Human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) manipulates cellular processes associated with secretory pathways withi (show more...)Human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) manipulates cellular processes associated with secretory pathways within an infected cell to facilitate efficient viral replication. However, little is known about how HCMV infection alters the surrounding cellular environment to promote virus spread to uninfected cells. Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are key signaling molecules that are commonly altered in numerous disease states. Previous reports have shown that viruses commonly alter EVs, which can significantly impact infection. This study finds that HCMV modulates EV biogenesis machinery through upregulation of the endosomal sorting complex required for transport (ESCRT) proteins. This regulation appears to increase the activity of EV biogenesis, since HCMV-infected fibroblasts have increased vesicle release and altered vesicle size compared to EVs from uninfected cells. EVs generated through ESCRT-independent pathways are also beneficial to virus spread in fibroblasts, as treatment with the EV inhibitor GW4869 slowed the efficiency of HCMV spread. Importantly, the transfer of EVs purified from HCMV-infected cells enhanced virus spread. This suggests that HCMV modulates the EV pathway to transfer proviral signals to uninfected cells that prime the cellular environment for incoming infection and enhance the efficiency of virus spread.IMPORTANCE Human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) is a herpesvirus that leads to serious health consequences in neonatal or immunocompromised patients. Clinical management of infection in these at-risk groups remains a serious concern even with approved antiviral therapies available. It is necessary to increase our understanding of the cellular changes that occur during infection and their importance to virus spread. This may help to identify new targets during infection that will lead to the development of novel treatment strategies. Extracellular vesicles (EVs) represent an important method of intercellular communication in the human host. This study finds that HCMV manipulates this pathway to increase the efficiency of virus spread to uninfected cells. This finding defines a new layer of host manipulation induced by HCMV infection that leads to enhanced virus spread. (hide)
EV-METRIC
89% (98th 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
HCMV infected 72hpi
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
DG
(d)(U)C
Filtration
Protein markers
EV: TSG101/ CD81/ HCMV glycoprotein B/ CD63
non-EV: Tubulin
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
Density not calculated
Show all info
Study aim
Function/Biogenesis/cargo sorting
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
primary human dermal fibroblasts
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 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 32 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
130000
Density gradient
Type
Discontinuous
Number of initial discontinuous layers
6
Lowest density fraction
5%
Highest density fraction
41%
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
5
Sample volume (mL)
1
Orientation
Bottom-up
Rotor type
SW 55 Ti
Speed (g)
130000
Duration (min)
960
Fraction volume (mL)
0.5
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
5
Pelleting: duration (min)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 55 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
130000
Filtration steps
0.45µm > x > 0.22µm,
Characterization: Protein analysis
PMID previous EV protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ HCMV glycoprotein B/ TSG101/ CD81
Not detected contaminants
Tubulin
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
PMID previous EV particle analysis
Extra particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
158
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
Yes, as number of particles per milliliter of starting sample 3.51E+10
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report type
Not Reported
EV-concentration
No
EV200001 1/9 Homo sapiens Cell culture supernatant DG
(d)(U)C
Useckaite, Zivile 2020 89%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Zivile Useckaite, Anindya Mukhopadhya, Barry Moran, Lorraine O'Driscoll
Journal
Sci Rep
Abstract
MET pathway is an important actionable target across many solid tumour types and several MET inhibit (show more...)MET pathway is an important actionable target across many solid tumour types and several MET inhibitors have been developed. Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are proposed to be mini-maps of their cells of origin. However, the potential of EVs to report on the MET status of their cells of origin is unknown. After applying three proposed methods of EV separation from medium conditioned by three cell lines of known MET status, this study used an extensive range of methodologies to fundamentally characterise the resulting particles (nanoparticle tracking analysis, TEM, flow cytometry, immunoblotting) and their MET status (RT-qPCR and ELISAs). The results indicated that ultracentrifugation on density-gradient (UC-DG) consistently produced the most reliable data with regards to purest EVs. EV cargo reflected MET mRNA, total MET and pMET status of their cells of origin. In conclusion, to simply determine if the general contents of conditioned medium reflect the MET status of the conditioning cells, choice of method for initial EV separation may not be crucial. However, to be confident of specifically studying EVs and thus EV-MET cargo, UC-DG followed by extensive EV characterisation is necessary. (hide)
EV-METRIC
89% (98th 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
DG
(d)(U)C
Protein markers
EV: Syntenin1/ CD63/ CD81/ HLA-DR/ pMET (pY1234/1235)/ ADAM10/ MET/ Actinin4/ CD9
non-EV: GRP94
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.15
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
EBC1
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
18h, 120000g;Other preparation
Cell viability (%)
99
Cell count
2.25E+08
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 70 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
10000
Density gradient
Type
Continuous
Lowest density fraction
5
Highest density fraction
40
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
17
Sample volume (mL)
3
Orientation
Bottom-up
Rotor type
SW 32.1 Ti
Speed (g)
120000
Duration (min)
1080
Fraction volume (mL)
5
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
17;17mL
Pelleting: duration (min)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 32.1 Ti;SW 32 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
120000
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
CD9/ CD63/ Syntenin1/ Actinin4
Not detected contaminants
GRP94
ELISA
Antibody details provided?
No
Detected EV-associated proteins
MET/ pMET (pY1234/1235)
Flow cytometry
Type of Flow cytometry
AMNIS ImageStreamX Mark II
Hardware adjustments
Laser powers were adjusted to ensure the fluorophore intensity was within the detection range. Fluorescent signals were collected using the following channels: FITC was measured in channel 2 (480560 n
Calibration bead size
80+
Antibody details provided?
No
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ CD9/ CD81/ ADAM10/ HLA-DR
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)(q)PCR
Database
No
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Modus
Reported size (nm)
111
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
Yes, as number of particles per million cells 86300000000
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up
EV200001 4/9 Homo sapiens Cell culture supernatant DG
(d)(U)C
Useckaite, Zivile 2020 89%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Zivile Useckaite, Anindya Mukhopadhya, Barry Moran, Lorraine O'Driscoll
Journal
Sci Rep
Abstract
MET pathway is an important actionable target across many solid tumour types and several MET inhibit (show more...)MET pathway is an important actionable target across many solid tumour types and several MET inhibitors have been developed. Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are proposed to be mini-maps of their cells of origin. However, the potential of EVs to report on the MET status of their cells of origin is unknown. After applying three proposed methods of EV separation from medium conditioned by three cell lines of known MET status, this study used an extensive range of methodologies to fundamentally characterise the resulting particles (nanoparticle tracking analysis, TEM, flow cytometry, immunoblotting) and their MET status (RT-qPCR and ELISAs). The results indicated that ultracentrifugation on density-gradient (UC-DG) consistently produced the most reliable data with regards to purest EVs. EV cargo reflected MET mRNA, total MET and pMET status of their cells of origin. In conclusion, to simply determine if the general contents of conditioned medium reflect the MET status of the conditioning cells, choice of method for initial EV separation may not be crucial. However, to be confident of specifically studying EVs and thus EV-MET cargo, UC-DG followed by extensive EV characterisation is necessary. (hide)
EV-METRIC
89% (98th 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
DG
(d)(U)C
Protein markers
EV: Syntenin1/ CD63/ CD81/ HLA-DR/ pMET (pY1234/1235)/ ADAM10/ MET/ Actinin4/ CD9
non-EV: GRP94
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.15
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
H596
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
18h, 120000g;Other preparation
Cell viability (%)
98
Cell count
2.03E+08
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 70 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
10000
Density gradient
Type
Continuous
Lowest density fraction
5
Highest density fraction
40
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
17
Sample volume (mL)
3
Orientation
Bottom-up
Rotor type
SW 32.1 Ti
Speed (g)
120000
Duration (min)
1080
Fraction volume (mL)
5
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
17;17mL
Pelleting: duration (min)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 32.1 Ti;SW 32 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
120000
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
Syntenin1/ Actinin4/ CD9/ CD63
Not detected contaminants
GRP94
ELISA
Antibody details provided?
No
Detected EV-associated proteins
MET/ pMET (pY1234/1235)
Flow cytometry
Type of Flow cytometry
AMNIS ImageStreamX Mark II
Hardware adjustments
Laser powers were adjusted to ensure the fluorophore intensity was within the detection range. Fluorescent signals were collected using the following channels: FITC was measured in channel 2 (480560 n
Calibration bead size
80+
Antibody details provided?
No
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ CD9/ CD81/ ADAM10/ HLA-DR
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)(q)PCR
Database
No
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Modus
Reported size (nm)
106
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
Yes, as number of particles per million cells 89500000000
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up
EV200001 7/9 Homo sapiens Cell culture supernatant DG
(d)(U)C
Useckaite, Zivile 2020 89%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Zivile Useckaite, Anindya Mukhopadhya, Barry Moran, Lorraine O'Driscoll
Journal
Sci Rep
Abstract
MET pathway is an important actionable target across many solid tumour types and several MET inhibit (show more...)MET pathway is an important actionable target across many solid tumour types and several MET inhibitors have been developed. Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are proposed to be mini-maps of their cells of origin. However, the potential of EVs to report on the MET status of their cells of origin is unknown. After applying three proposed methods of EV separation from medium conditioned by three cell lines of known MET status, this study used an extensive range of methodologies to fundamentally characterise the resulting particles (nanoparticle tracking analysis, TEM, flow cytometry, immunoblotting) and their MET status (RT-qPCR and ELISAs). The results indicated that ultracentrifugation on density-gradient (UC-DG) consistently produced the most reliable data with regards to purest EVs. EV cargo reflected MET mRNA, total MET and pMET status of their cells of origin. In conclusion, to simply determine if the general contents of conditioned medium reflect the MET status of the conditioning cells, choice of method for initial EV separation may not be crucial. However, to be confident of specifically studying EVs and thus EV-MET cargo, UC-DG followed by extensive EV characterisation is necessary. (hide)
EV-METRIC
89% (98th 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
DG
(d)(U)C
Protein markers
EV: Syntenin1/ CD63/ CD81/ HLA-DR/ pMET (pY1234/1235)/ ADAM10/ MET/ Actinin4/ CD9
non-EV: GRP94
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.15
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
Hs746T
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
18h, 120000g;Other preparation
Cell viability (%)
98
Cell count
2.03E+08
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 70 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
10000
Density gradient
Type
Continuous
Lowest density fraction
5
Highest density fraction
40
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
17
Sample volume (mL)
3
Orientation
Bottom-up
Rotor type
SW 32.1 Ti
Speed (g)
120000
Duration (min)
1080
Fraction volume (mL)
5
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
17;17mL
Pelleting: duration (min)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 32.1 Ti;SW 32 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
120000
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
Syntenin1/ Actinin4/ CD9/ CD63
Not detected contaminants
GRP94
ELISA
Antibody details provided?
No
Detected EV-associated proteins
MET/ pMET (pY1234/1235)
Flow cytometry
Type of Flow cytometry
AMNIS ImageStreamX Mark II
Hardware adjustments
Laser powers were adjusted to ensure the fluorophore intensity was within the detection range. Fluorescent signals were collected using the following channels: FITC was measured in channel 2 (480560 n
Calibration bead size
80+
Antibody details provided?
No
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ CD9/ CD81/ ADAM10/ HLA-DR
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)(q)PCR
Database
No
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Modus
Reported size (nm)
107
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
Yes, as number of particles per million cells 29000000000
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up
EV200073 2/4 Homo sapiens Solid Tissue (d)(U)C
Size-exclusion chromatopraphy (IZON)
DC
DG
Bordas, Marie 2020 88%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Marie Bordas, Géraldine Genard, Sibylle Ohl, Michelle Nessling, Karsten Richter, Tobias Roider, Sascha Dietrich, Kendra K Maaß, Martina Seiffert
Journal
Int J Mol Sci
Abstract
Small extracellular vesicles (sEVs) are nanoparticles responsible for cell-to-cell communication rel (show more...)Small extracellular vesicles (sEVs) are nanoparticles responsible for cell-to-cell communication released by healthy and cancer cells. Different roles have been described for sEVs in physiological and pathological contexts, including acceleration of tissue regeneration, modulation of tumor microenvironment, or premetastatic niche formation, and they are discussed as promising biomarkers for diagnosis and prognosis in body fluids. Although efforts have been made to standardize techniques for isolation and characterization of sEVs, current protocols often result in co-isolation of soluble protein or lipid complexes and of other extracellular vesicles. The risk of contaminated preparations is particularly high when isolating sEVs from tissues. As a consequence, the interpretation of data aiming at understanding the functional role of sEVs remains challenging and inconsistent. Here, we report an optimized protocol for isolation of sEVs from human and murine lymphoid tissues. sEVs from freshly resected human lymph nodes and murine spleens were isolated comparing two different approaches-(1) ultracentrifugation on a sucrose density cushion and (2) combined ultracentrifugation with size-exclusion chromatography. The purity of sEV preparations was analyzed using state-of-the-art techniques, including immunoblots, nanoparticle tracking analysis, and electron microscopy. Our results clearly demonstrate the superiority of size-exclusion chromatography, which resulted in a higher yield and purity of sEVs, and we show that their functionality alters significantly between the two isolation protocols. (hide)
EV-METRIC
88% (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
Solid Tissue
Sample origin
CLL
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
Size-exclusion chromatopraphy (IZON)
DC
DG
Protein markers
EV: TSG101/ CD81/ Flotillin1/ CD9
non-EV: cytochrome C/ GM130/ Calreticulin
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.12
Show all info
Study aim
Function/New methodological development/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Solid Tissue
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 50,000 g and 100,000 g
Density gradient
Type
Discontinuous
Number of initial discontinuous layers
2
Lowest density fraction
0%
Highest density fraction
40%
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
10.5
Sample volume (mL)
7
Orientation
Top-down
Rotor type
SW 40 Ti
Speed (g)
100
Duration (min)
120
Fraction volume (mL)
2.5
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
11
Pelleting: duration (min)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 40 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Density cushion
Density medium
Sucrose
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
Flotillin1/ CD9/ TSG101/ CD81
Detected contaminants
Calreticulin
Not detected contaminants
cytochrome C/ GM130
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
150
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
Yes, as number of particles per milliliter of starting sample 1.00E+10
EM
EM-type
Immuno-EM/ Transmission-EM
Proteïns
Other;HLA-DR
Image type
Close-up
EV200073 4/4 Mus musculus Solid Tissue (d)(U)C
Size-exclusion chromatopraphy (IZON)
DC
DG
Bordas, Marie 2020 88%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Marie Bordas, Géraldine Genard, Sibylle Ohl, Michelle Nessling, Karsten Richter, Tobias Roider, Sascha Dietrich, Kendra K Maaß, Martina Seiffert
Journal
Int J Mol Sci
Abstract
Small extracellular vesicles (sEVs) are nanoparticles responsible for cell-to-cell communication rel (show more...)Small extracellular vesicles (sEVs) are nanoparticles responsible for cell-to-cell communication released by healthy and cancer cells. Different roles have been described for sEVs in physiological and pathological contexts, including acceleration of tissue regeneration, modulation of tumor microenvironment, or premetastatic niche formation, and they are discussed as promising biomarkers for diagnosis and prognosis in body fluids. Although efforts have been made to standardize techniques for isolation and characterization of sEVs, current protocols often result in co-isolation of soluble protein or lipid complexes and of other extracellular vesicles. The risk of contaminated preparations is particularly high when isolating sEVs from tissues. As a consequence, the interpretation of data aiming at understanding the functional role of sEVs remains challenging and inconsistent. Here, we report an optimized protocol for isolation of sEVs from human and murine lymphoid tissues. sEVs from freshly resected human lymph nodes and murine spleens were isolated comparing two different approaches-(1) ultracentrifugation on a sucrose density cushion and (2) combined ultracentrifugation with size-exclusion chromatography. The purity of sEV preparations was analyzed using state-of-the-art techniques, including immunoblots, nanoparticle tracking analysis, and electron microscopy. Our results clearly demonstrate the superiority of size-exclusion chromatography, which resulted in a higher yield and purity of sEVs, and we show that their functionality alters significantly between the two isolation protocols. (hide)
EV-METRIC
88% (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
Solid Tissue
Sample origin
CLL
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
Size-exclusion chromatopraphy (IZON)
DC
DG
Protein markers
EV: Alix/ TSG101/ Flotillin1
non-EV: ATPA5/ Calreticulin
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.12
Show all info
Study aim
Function/New methodological development/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Mus musculus
Sample Type
Solid Tissue
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 50,000 g and 100,000 g
Density gradient
Type
Discontinuous
Number of initial discontinuous layers
2
Lowest density fraction
0%
Highest density fraction
40%
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
10.5
Sample volume (mL)
7
Orientation
Top-down
Rotor type
SW 40 Ti
Speed (g)
100
Duration (min)
120
Fraction volume (mL)
2.5
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
11
Pelleting: duration (min)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 40 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Density cushion
Density medium
Sucrose
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
Flotillin1/ Alix/ TSG101
Detected contaminants
Calreticulin
Not detected contaminants
ATPA5
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
140
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
Yes, as number of particles per milliliter of starting sample 7.00E+09
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up
EV180012 1/1 Mus musculus Cell culture supernatant DG
(d)(U)C
Filtration
UF
Van Deun, Jan 2020 87%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Jan Van Deun, Quentin Roux, Sarah Deville, Thibaut Van Acker, Pekka Rappu, Ilkka Miinalainen, Jyrki Heino, Frank Vanhaecke, Bruno G De Geest, Olivier De Wever, An Hendrix
Journal
Cells
Abstract
Biomimetic functionalization to confer stealth and targeting properties to nanoparticles is a field (show more...)Biomimetic functionalization to confer stealth and targeting properties to nanoparticles is a field of intense study. Extracellular vesicles (EV), sub-micron delivery vehicles for intercellular communication, have unique characteristics for drug delivery. We investigated the top-down functionalization of gold nanoparticles with extracellular vesicle membranes, including both lipids and associated membrane proteins, through mechanical extrusion. EV surface-exposed membrane proteins were confirmed to help avoid unwanted elimination by macrophages, while improving autologous uptake. EV membrane morphology, protein composition and orientation were found to be unaffected by mechanical extrusion. We implemented complementary EV characterization methods, including transmission- and immune-electron microscopy, and nanoparticle tracking analysis, to verify membrane coating, size and zeta potential of the EV membrane-cloaked nanoparticles. While successful EV membrane coating of the gold nanoparticles resulted in lower macrophage uptake, low yield was found to be a significant downside of the extrusion approach. Our data incentivize more research to leverage EV membrane biomimicking as a unique drug delivery approach in the near future. (hide)
EV-METRIC
87% (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
DG
(d)(U)C
Filtration
UF
Protein markers
EV: Alix/ TSG101/ Flotillin1/ CD9
non-EV: None
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function
Sample
Species
Mus musculus
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
4T1
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted serum
Preparation of EDS
>=18h at >= 100,000g
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Density gradient
Type
Discontinuous
Number of initial discontinuous layers
4
Lowest density fraction
0.05
Highest density fraction
0.4
Sample volume (mL)
1
Orientation
Top-down (sample migrates downwards)
Rotor type
SW 32.1 Ti
Speed (g)
100000
Duration (min)
1080
Fraction volume (mL)
1
Fraction processing
Size-exclusion chromatography
Ultra filtration
Cut-off size (kDa)
10
Membrane type
Regenerated cellulose
Characterization: Protein analysis
PMID previous EV protein analysis
Proteomics
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
Alix, TSG101, CD9, Flotillin1
Proteomics database
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
PMID previous EV particle analysis
Electron microscopy
Extra particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
113.4±2.8
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM/ Immune-EM
Proteïns
CD9
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV200065 1/4 Homo sapiens Cell culture supernatant (d)(U)C
Filtration
Victoria Stary 2020 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Victoria Stary, Brigitte Wolf, Daniela Unterleuthner, Julia List, Merjem Talic, Johannes Längle, Andrea Beer, Johanna Strobl, Georg Stary, Helmut Dolznig, Michael Bergmann Md
Journal
Methods & Clinical Development
Abstract
Background: Tumor-associated macrophages (TAM) constitute the most abundant immune cells in the tumo (show more...)Background: Tumor-associated macrophages (TAM) constitute the most abundant immune cells in the tumor stroma initiating pro-inflammatory (M1) or immunosuppressive (M2) responses depending on their polarization status. Advances in tumor immunotherapy call for a detailed understanding of potential immunogenic mechanisms of irradiation routinely applied in rectal cancer patients. Methods: To test the effects of radiotherapy on TAM, we ex vivo irradiated tissue samples of human rectal cancer and assessed the phenotype by flow cytometry. We furthermore evaluated the distribution of leucocyte subsets in tissue sections of patients after short-course radiotherapy and compared findings to non-pretreated rectal cancer using an immunostaining approach. Organotypic assays (OTA) consisting of macrophages, cancer-associated fibroblast and cancer cell lines were used to dissect the immunological consequences of irradiation in macrophages. Results: We demonstrate that short-course neoadjuvant radiotherapy in rectal cancer patients is associated with a shift in the polarization of TAM towards an M1-like pro-inflammatory phenotype. In addition, ex vivo irradiation caused an increase in the phagocytic activity and enhanced expression of markers associated with stimulatory signals necessary for T-cell activation. In OTA we observed that this alteration in macrophage polarization could be mediated by extracellular vesicles (EV) derived from irradiated tumor cells. We identified high mobility group box 1 in EV from irradiated tumor cells as a potential effector signal in that crosstalk. Conclusions: Our findings highlight macrophages as potential effector cells upon irradiation in rectal cancer by diminishing their immunosuppressive phenotype and activate pro-inflammation. Our data indicate that clinically applied short-term radiotherapy for rectal cancer may be exploited to stimulate immunogenic macrophages and suggest to target the polarization status of macrophages to enhance future immunotherapeutic strategies. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (96th 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
Protein markers
EV: CD9/ CD81/ TSG101
non-EV: Calreticulin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
DLD1
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
>=18h at >=100,000g
Cell viability (%)
85
Cell count
3.00E+07
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Equal to or above 150,000 g
Between 50,000 g and 100,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
90
Pelleting: rotor type
T-1250
Pelleting: speed (g)
243836
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
1
Wash: time (min)
90
Wash: Rotor Type
SW 41 Ti
Wash: speed (g)
92,500
Filtration steps
0.22µm or 0.2µm
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
CD9/ CD81/ TSG101
Not detected contaminants
Calreticulin
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
132
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM/ Cryo-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV200065 2/4 Homo sapiens Cell culture supernatant (d)(U)C
Filtration
Victoria Stary 2020 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Victoria Stary, Brigitte Wolf, Daniela Unterleuthner, Julia List, Merjem Talic, Johannes Längle, Andrea Beer, Johanna Strobl, Georg Stary, Helmut Dolznig, Michael Bergmann Md
Journal
Methods & Clinical Development
Abstract
Background: Tumor-associated macrophages (TAM) constitute the most abundant immune cells in the tumo (show more...)Background: Tumor-associated macrophages (TAM) constitute the most abundant immune cells in the tumor stroma initiating pro-inflammatory (M1) or immunosuppressive (M2) responses depending on their polarization status. Advances in tumor immunotherapy call for a detailed understanding of potential immunogenic mechanisms of irradiation routinely applied in rectal cancer patients. Methods: To test the effects of radiotherapy on TAM, we ex vivo irradiated tissue samples of human rectal cancer and assessed the phenotype by flow cytometry. We furthermore evaluated the distribution of leucocyte subsets in tissue sections of patients after short-course radiotherapy and compared findings to non-pretreated rectal cancer using an immunostaining approach. Organotypic assays (OTA) consisting of macrophages, cancer-associated fibroblast and cancer cell lines were used to dissect the immunological consequences of irradiation in macrophages. Results: We demonstrate that short-course neoadjuvant radiotherapy in rectal cancer patients is associated with a shift in the polarization of TAM towards an M1-like pro-inflammatory phenotype. In addition, ex vivo irradiation caused an increase in the phagocytic activity and enhanced expression of markers associated with stimulatory signals necessary for T-cell activation. In OTA we observed that this alteration in macrophage polarization could be mediated by extracellular vesicles (EV) derived from irradiated tumor cells. We identified high mobility group box 1 in EV from irradiated tumor cells as a potential effector signal in that crosstalk. Conclusions: Our findings highlight macrophages as potential effector cells upon irradiation in rectal cancer by diminishing their immunosuppressive phenotype and activate pro-inflammation. Our data indicate that clinically applied short-term radiotherapy for rectal cancer may be exploited to stimulate immunogenic macrophages and suggest to target the polarization status of macrophages to enhance future immunotherapeutic strategies. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (96th 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
gamma irradiation
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: CD9/ CD81/ TSG101
non-EV: Calreticulin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
DLD1
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
>=18h at >=100,000g
Cell viability (%)
85
Cell count
3.00E+07
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Equal to or above 150,000 g
Between 50,000 g and 100,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
90
Pelleting: rotor type
T-1250
Pelleting: speed (g)
243836
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
1
Wash: time (min)
90
Wash: Rotor Type
SW 41 Ti
Wash: speed (g)
92,500
Filtration steps
0.22µm or 0.2µm
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
CD9/ CD81/ TSG101
Not detected contaminants
Calreticulin
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
137
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM/ Cryo-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV200065 3/4 Homo sapiens Cell culture supernatant (d)(U)C
Filtration
Victoria Stary 2020 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Victoria Stary, Brigitte Wolf, Daniela Unterleuthner, Julia List, Merjem Talic, Johannes Längle, Andrea Beer, Johanna Strobl, Georg Stary, Helmut Dolznig, Michael Bergmann Md
Journal
Methods & Clinical Development
Abstract
Background: Tumor-associated macrophages (TAM) constitute the most abundant immune cells in the tumo (show more...)Background: Tumor-associated macrophages (TAM) constitute the most abundant immune cells in the tumor stroma initiating pro-inflammatory (M1) or immunosuppressive (M2) responses depending on their polarization status. Advances in tumor immunotherapy call for a detailed understanding of potential immunogenic mechanisms of irradiation routinely applied in rectal cancer patients. Methods: To test the effects of radiotherapy on TAM, we ex vivo irradiated tissue samples of human rectal cancer and assessed the phenotype by flow cytometry. We furthermore evaluated the distribution of leucocyte subsets in tissue sections of patients after short-course radiotherapy and compared findings to non-pretreated rectal cancer using an immunostaining approach. Organotypic assays (OTA) consisting of macrophages, cancer-associated fibroblast and cancer cell lines were used to dissect the immunological consequences of irradiation in macrophages. Results: We demonstrate that short-course neoadjuvant radiotherapy in rectal cancer patients is associated with a shift in the polarization of TAM towards an M1-like pro-inflammatory phenotype. In addition, ex vivo irradiation caused an increase in the phagocytic activity and enhanced expression of markers associated with stimulatory signals necessary for T-cell activation. In OTA we observed that this alteration in macrophage polarization could be mediated by extracellular vesicles (EV) derived from irradiated tumor cells. We identified high mobility group box 1 in EV from irradiated tumor cells as a potential effector signal in that crosstalk. Conclusions: Our findings highlight macrophages as potential effector cells upon irradiation in rectal cancer by diminishing their immunosuppressive phenotype and activate pro-inflammation. Our data indicate that clinically applied short-term radiotherapy for rectal cancer may be exploited to stimulate immunogenic macrophages and suggest to target the polarization status of macrophages to enhance future immunotherapeutic strategies. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (96th 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
Protein markers
EV: CD9/ CD81/ TSG101
non-EV: Calreticulin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
HCT116
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
>=18h at >=100,000g
Cell viability (%)
85
Cell count
4.00E+07
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Equal to or above 150,000 g
Between 50,000 g and 100,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
90
Pelleting: rotor type
T-1250
Pelleting: speed (g)
243836
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
1
Wash: time (min)
90
Wash: Rotor Type
SW 41 Ti
Wash: speed (g)
92,500
Filtration steps
0.22µm or 0.2µm
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
CD9/ CD81/ TSG101
Not detected contaminants
Calreticulin
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
157
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM/ Cryo-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV200065 4/4 Homo sapiens Cell culture supernatant (d)(U)C
Filtration
Victoria Stary 2020 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Victoria Stary, Brigitte Wolf, Daniela Unterleuthner, Julia List, Merjem Talic, Johannes Längle, Andrea Beer, Johanna Strobl, Georg Stary, Helmut Dolznig, Michael Bergmann Md
Journal
Methods & Clinical Development
Abstract
Background: Tumor-associated macrophages (TAM) constitute the most abundant immune cells in the tumo (show more...)Background: Tumor-associated macrophages (TAM) constitute the most abundant immune cells in the tumor stroma initiating pro-inflammatory (M1) or immunosuppressive (M2) responses depending on their polarization status. Advances in tumor immunotherapy call for a detailed understanding of potential immunogenic mechanisms of irradiation routinely applied in rectal cancer patients. Methods: To test the effects of radiotherapy on TAM, we ex vivo irradiated tissue samples of human rectal cancer and assessed the phenotype by flow cytometry. We furthermore evaluated the distribution of leucocyte subsets in tissue sections of patients after short-course radiotherapy and compared findings to non-pretreated rectal cancer using an immunostaining approach. Organotypic assays (OTA) consisting of macrophages, cancer-associated fibroblast and cancer cell lines were used to dissect the immunological consequences of irradiation in macrophages. Results: We demonstrate that short-course neoadjuvant radiotherapy in rectal cancer patients is associated with a shift in the polarization of TAM towards an M1-like pro-inflammatory phenotype. In addition, ex vivo irradiation caused an increase in the phagocytic activity and enhanced expression of markers associated with stimulatory signals necessary for T-cell activation. In OTA we observed that this alteration in macrophage polarization could be mediated by extracellular vesicles (EV) derived from irradiated tumor cells. We identified high mobility group box 1 in EV from irradiated tumor cells as a potential effector signal in that crosstalk. Conclusions: Our findings highlight macrophages as potential effector cells upon irradiation in rectal cancer by diminishing their immunosuppressive phenotype and activate pro-inflammation. Our data indicate that clinically applied short-term radiotherapy for rectal cancer may be exploited to stimulate immunogenic macrophages and suggest to target the polarization status of macrophages to enhance future immunotherapeutic strategies. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (96th 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
gamma irradiation
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: CD9/ CD81/ TSG101
non-EV: Calreticulin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
HCT116
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
>=18h at >=100,000g
Cell viability (%)
85
Cell count
4.00E+07
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Equal to or above 150,000 g
Between 50,000 g and 100,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
90
Pelleting: rotor type
T-1250
Pelleting: speed (g)
243836
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
1
Wash: time (min)
90
Wash: Rotor Type
SW 41 Ti
Wash: speed (g)
92,500
Filtration steps
0.22µm or 0.2µm
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
CD9/ CD81/ TSG101
Not detected contaminants
Calreticulin
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
161
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM/ Cryo-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV200036 1/16 Homo sapiens Cell culture supernatant DG
(d)(U)C
qEV
Juan Antonio Fafián-Labora 2020 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Juan Antonio Fafián-Labora, Jose Antonio Rodríguez-Navarro, Ana O'Loghlen
Journal
Cell metab
Abstract
Aging is a process of cellular and tissue dysfunction characterized by different hallmarks, includin (show more...)Aging is a process of cellular and tissue dysfunction characterized by different hallmarks, including cellular senescence. However, there is proof that certain features of aging and senescence can be ameliorated. Here, we provide evidence that small extracellular vesicles (sEVs) isolated from primary fibroblasts of young human donors ameliorate certain biomarkers of senescence in cells derived from old and Hutchinson-Gilford progeria syndrome donors. Importantly, sEVs from young cells ameliorate senescence in a variety of tissues in old mice. Mechanistically, we identified sEVs to have intrinsic glutathione-S-transferase activity partially due to the high levels of expression of the glutathione-related protein (GSTM2). Transfection of recombinant GSTM2 into sEVs derived from old fibroblasts restores their antioxidant capacity. sEVs increase the levels of reduced glutathione and decrease oxidative stress and lipid peroxidation both in vivo and in vitro. Altogether, our data provide an indication of the potential of sEVs as regenerative therapy in aging. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (96th 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
Young donors
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
DG
(d)(U)C
Commercial method
Protein markers
EV: Alix/ TSG101/ GSTM2
non-EV: Calnexin/ Actin-beta
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.074-1.106
Show all info
Study aim
Function
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
human skin primary fibroblasts
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
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: time(min)
80
Pelleting: rotor type
T-865
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
15
Wash: time (min)
80
Wash: Rotor Type
T-865
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Density gradient
Type
Discontinuous
Number of initial discontinuous layers
3
Lowest density fraction
10%
Highest density fraction
60%
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
5.5
Sample volume (mL)
1.5
Orientation
Bottom-up
Rotor type
T-865
Speed (g)
100000
Duration (min)
720
Fraction volume (mL)
0.7
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
15
Pelleting: duration (min)
80
Pelleting: rotor type
T-865
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Pelleting-wash: volume per pellet (mL)
15
Pelleting-wash: duration (min)
80
Pelleting-wash: speed (g)
T-865
Commercial kit
qEV
EV-subtype
Distinction between multiple subtypes
Size
Used subtypes
<200 nm
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
Alix/ TSG101/ GSTM2
Not detected contaminants
Calnexin/ Actin-beta
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
<200
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
Number of particles of starting sample E08-E09
EV200036 3/16 Homo sapiens Cell culture supernatant DG
(d)(U)C
qEV
Juan Antonio Fafián-Labora 2020 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Juan Antonio Fafián-Labora, Jose Antonio Rodríguez-Navarro, Ana O'Loghlen
Journal
Cell metab
Abstract
Aging is a process of cellular and tissue dysfunction characterized by different hallmarks, includin (show more...)Aging is a process of cellular and tissue dysfunction characterized by different hallmarks, including cellular senescence. However, there is proof that certain features of aging and senescence can be ameliorated. Here, we provide evidence that small extracellular vesicles (sEVs) isolated from primary fibroblasts of young human donors ameliorate certain biomarkers of senescence in cells derived from old and Hutchinson-Gilford progeria syndrome donors. Importantly, sEVs from young cells ameliorate senescence in a variety of tissues in old mice. Mechanistically, we identified sEVs to have intrinsic glutathione-S-transferase activity partially due to the high levels of expression of the glutathione-related protein (GSTM2). Transfection of recombinant GSTM2 into sEVs derived from old fibroblasts restores their antioxidant capacity. sEVs increase the levels of reduced glutathione and decrease oxidative stress and lipid peroxidation both in vivo and in vitro. Altogether, our data provide an indication of the potential of sEVs as regenerative therapy in aging. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (96th 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
Old donors
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
DG
(d)(U)C
Commercial method
Protein markers
EV: Alix/ TSG101/ GSTM2
non-EV: Calnexin/ Actin-beta
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.074-1.106
Show all info
Study aim
Function
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
human skin primary fibroblasts
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
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: time(min)
80
Pelleting: rotor type
T-865
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
15
Wash: time (min)
80
Wash: Rotor Type
T-865
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Density gradient
Type
Discontinuous
Number of initial discontinuous layers
3
Lowest density fraction
10%
Highest density fraction
60%
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
5.5
Sample volume (mL)
1.5
Orientation
Bottom-up
Rotor type
T-865
Speed (g)
100000
Duration (min)
720
Fraction volume (mL)
0.7
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
15
Pelleting: duration (min)
80
Pelleting: rotor type
T-865
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Pelleting-wash: volume per pellet (mL)
15
Pelleting-wash: duration (min)
80
Pelleting-wash: speed (g)
T-865
Commercial kit
qEV
EV-subtype
Distinction between multiple subtypes
Size
Used subtypes
<200 nm
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes
Antibody dilution provided?
Yes
Lysis buffer provided?
Yes
Detected EV-associated proteins
Alix/ TSG101/ GSTM2
Not detected contaminants
Calnexin/ Actin-beta
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
<200
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
Number of particles of starting sample E08-E09
EV190095 1/2 Mus musculus Cell culture supernatant (d)(U)C
SEC
Van den Broek, Bram 2020 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Bram Van den Broek, Isabel Pintelon, Ibrahim Hamad, Sofie Kessels, Mansour Haidar, Niels Hellings, Jerome J.A. Hendriks, Markus Kleinewietfeld, Bert Brône, Vincent Timmerman, Jean‐Pierre Timmermans, Veerle Somers, Luc Michiels, Joy Irobi
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Microglia, the immunocompetent cells of the central nervous system (CNS), play an important role in (show more...)Microglia, the immunocompetent cells of the central nervous system (CNS), play an important role in maintaining cellular homeostasis in the CNS. These cells secrete immunomodulatory factors including nanovesicles and participate in the removal of cellular debris by phagocytosis or autophagy. Accumulating evidence indicates that specifically the cellular exchange of small extracellular vesicles (EVs), participates in physiology and disease through intercellular communication. However, the contribution of microglial‐derived extracellular vesicles (M‐EVs) to the maintenance of microglia homeostasis and how M‐EVs could influence the phenotype and gene function of other microglia subtypes is unclear. In addition, knowledge of canonical signalling pathways of inflammation and immunity gene expression patterns in human microglia exposed to M‐EVs is limited. Here, we analysed the effects of M‐EVs produced in vitro by either tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) activated or non‐activated microglia BV2 cells. We showed that M‐EVs are internalized by both mouse and human C20 microglia cells and that the uptake of M‐EVs in microglia induced autophagic vesicles at various stages of degradation including autophagosomes and autolysosomes. Consistently, stimulation of microglia with M‐EVs increased the protein expression of the autophagy marker, microtubule‐associated proteins 1A/1B light chain 3B isoform II (LC3B‐II), and promoted autophagic flux in live cells. To elucidate the biological activities occurring at the transcriptional level in C20 microglia stimulated with M‐EVs, the gene expression profiles, potential upstream regulators, and enrichment pathways were characterized using targeted RNA sequencing. Inflammation and immunity transcriptome gene panel sequencing of both activated and normal microglia stimulated with M‐EVs showed involvement of several canonical pathways and reduced expression of key genes involved in neuroinflammation, inflammasome and apoptosis signalling pathways compared to control cells. In this study, we provide the perspective that a beneficial activity of in vitro cell culture produced EVs could be the modulation of autophagy during cellular stress. Therefore, we use a monoculture system to study microglia‐microglia crosstalk which is important in the prevention and propagation of inflammation in the brain. We demonstrate that in vitro produced microglial EVs are able to influence multiple biological pathways and promote activation of autophagy in order to maintain microglia survival and homeostasis. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (96th 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
SEC
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ Flotillin1/ Annexin A2
non-EV: GRP94
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function
Sample
Species
Mus musculus
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
BV2
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
Commercial EDS
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
180
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 70 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
115000
Size-exclusion chromatography
Used for validation?
Yes
Total column volume (mL)
10
Sample volume/column (mL)
0.5
Resin type
Sepharose CL-2B
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
Flotillin1/ Annexin A2/ CD81
Not detected contaminants
GRP94
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Size range/distribution
Reported size (nm)
30-200
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
100
EV190095 2/2 Mus musculus Cell culture supernatant (d)(U)C
SEC
Van den Broek, Bram 2020 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Bram Van den Broek, Isabel Pintelon, Ibrahim Hamad, Sofie Kessels, Mansour Haidar, Niels Hellings, Jerome J.A. Hendriks, Markus Kleinewietfeld, Bert Brône, Vincent Timmerman, Jean‐Pierre Timmermans, Veerle Somers, Luc Michiels, Joy Irobi
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Microglia, the immunocompetent cells of the central nervous system (CNS), play an important role in (show more...)Microglia, the immunocompetent cells of the central nervous system (CNS), play an important role in maintaining cellular homeostasis in the CNS. These cells secrete immunomodulatory factors including nanovesicles and participate in the removal of cellular debris by phagocytosis or autophagy. Accumulating evidence indicates that specifically the cellular exchange of small extracellular vesicles (EVs), participates in physiology and disease through intercellular communication. However, the contribution of microglial‐derived extracellular vesicles (M‐EVs) to the maintenance of microglia homeostasis and how M‐EVs could influence the phenotype and gene function of other microglia subtypes is unclear. In addition, knowledge of canonical signalling pathways of inflammation and immunity gene expression patterns in human microglia exposed to M‐EVs is limited. Here, we analysed the effects of M‐EVs produced in vitro by either tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) activated or non‐activated microglia BV2 cells. We showed that M‐EVs are internalized by both mouse and human C20 microglia cells and that the uptake of M‐EVs in microglia induced autophagic vesicles at various stages of degradation including autophagosomes and autolysosomes. Consistently, stimulation of microglia with M‐EVs increased the protein expression of the autophagy marker, microtubule‐associated proteins 1A/1B light chain 3B isoform II (LC3B‐II), and promoted autophagic flux in live cells. To elucidate the biological activities occurring at the transcriptional level in C20 microglia stimulated with M‐EVs, the gene expression profiles, potential upstream regulators, and enrichment pathways were characterized using targeted RNA sequencing. Inflammation and immunity transcriptome gene panel sequencing of both activated and normal microglia stimulated with M‐EVs showed involvement of several canonical pathways and reduced expression of key genes involved in neuroinflammation, inflammasome and apoptosis signalling pathways compared to control cells. In this study, we provide the perspective that a beneficial activity of in vitro cell culture produced EVs could be the modulation of autophagy during cellular stress. Therefore, we use a monoculture system to study microglia‐microglia crosstalk which is important in the prevention and propagation of inflammation in the brain. We demonstrate that in vitro produced microglial EVs are able to influence multiple biological pathways and promote activation of autophagy in order to maintain microglia survival and homeostasis. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (96th 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
TNFa stimulated
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
SEC
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ Flotillin1/ Annexin A2
non-EV: GRP94
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function
Sample
Species
Mus musculus
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
BV2
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
Commercial EDS
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
180
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 70 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
115000
Size-exclusion chromatography
Used for validation?
Yes
Total column volume (mL)
10
Sample volume/column (mL)
0.5
Resin type
Sepharose CL-2B
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
Flotillin1/ Annexin A2/ CD81
Not detected contaminants
GRP94
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Size range/distribution
Reported size (nm)
30-200
EV concentration
Yes
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
100
EV190084 1/2 Homo sapiens Cell culture supernatant (d)(U)C
Filtration
Greet Merckx 2020 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Greet Merckx, Baharak Hosseinkhani, Sören Kuypers, Sarah Deville, Joy Irobi, Inge Nelissen, Luc Michiels, Ivo Lambrichts, Annelies Bronckaers
Journal
Cells
Abstract
Blood vessel formation or angiogenesis is a key process for successful tooth regeneration. Bone marr (show more...)Blood vessel formation or angiogenesis is a key process for successful tooth regeneration. Bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells (BM-MSCs) possess paracrine proangiogenic properties, which are, at least partially, induced by their extracellular vesicles (EVs). However, the isolation of BM-MSCs is associated with several drawbacks, which could be overcome by MSC-like cells of the teeth, called dental pulp stromal cells (DPSCs). This study aims to compare the angiogenic content and functions of DPSC and BM-MSC EVs and conditioned medium (CM). The angiogenic protein profile of DPSC- and BM-MSC-derived EVs, CM and EV-depleted CM was screened by an antibody array and confirmed by ELISA. Functional angiogenic effects were tested in transwell migration and chicken chorioallantoic membrane assays. All secretion fractions contained several pro- and anti-angiogenic proteins and induced in vitro endothelial cell motility. This chemotactic potential was higher for (EV-depleted) CM, compared to EVs with a stronger effect for BM-MSCs. Finally, BM-MSC CM, but not DPSC CM, nor EVs, increased in ovo angiogenesis. In conclusion, we showed that DPSCs are less potent in relation to endothelial cell chemotaxis and in ovo neovascularization, compared to BM-MSCs, which emphasizes the importance of choice of cell type and secretion fraction for stem cell-based regenerative therapies in inducing angiogenesis. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (96th 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
Protein markers
EV: CD9/ CD63/ ANXA2/ CD81
non-EV: Bax
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function/Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
Dental pulp stromal cells
EV-harvesting Medium
Serum free medium
Cell viability (%)
95
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
180
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 70 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Filtration steps
0.22µm or 0.2µm
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
CD9/ CD63/ ANXA2/ CD81
Not detected contaminants
Bax
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV190084 2/2 Homo sapiens Cell culture supernatant (d)(U)C
Filtration
Greet Merckx 2020 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Greet Merckx, Baharak Hosseinkhani, Sören Kuypers, Sarah Deville, Joy Irobi, Inge Nelissen, Luc Michiels, Ivo Lambrichts, Annelies Bronckaers
Journal
Cells
Abstract
Blood vessel formation or angiogenesis is a key process for successful tooth regeneration. Bone marr (show more...)Blood vessel formation or angiogenesis is a key process for successful tooth regeneration. Bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells (BM-MSCs) possess paracrine proangiogenic properties, which are, at least partially, induced by their extracellular vesicles (EVs). However, the isolation of BM-MSCs is associated with several drawbacks, which could be overcome by MSC-like cells of the teeth, called dental pulp stromal cells (DPSCs). This study aims to compare the angiogenic content and functions of DPSC and BM-MSC EVs and conditioned medium (CM). The angiogenic protein profile of DPSC- and BM-MSC-derived EVs, CM and EV-depleted CM was screened by an antibody array and confirmed by ELISA. Functional angiogenic effects were tested in transwell migration and chicken chorioallantoic membrane assays. All secretion fractions contained several pro- and anti-angiogenic proteins and induced in vitro endothelial cell motility. This chemotactic potential was higher for (EV-depleted) CM, compared to EVs with a stronger effect for BM-MSCs. Finally, BM-MSC CM, but not DPSC CM, nor EVs, increased in ovo angiogenesis. In conclusion, we showed that DPSCs are less potent in relation to endothelial cell chemotaxis and in ovo neovascularization, compared to BM-MSCs, which emphasizes the importance of choice of cell type and secretion fraction for stem cell-based regenerative therapies in inducing angiogenesis. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (96th 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
Protein markers
EV: CD9/ CD63/ ANXA2/ CD81
non-EV: Bax
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function/Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
Bone marrow derived mesenchymal stromal cells
EV-harvesting Medium
Serum free medium
Cell viability (%)
95
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
180
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 70 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Filtration steps
0.22µm or 0.2µm
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
CD9/ CD63/ ANXA2/ CD81
Not detected contaminants
Bax
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV190079 1/2 Homo sapiens kidney tissue supernatant (d)(U)C
Filtration
Zieren RC 2020 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Zieren RC, Dong L, Pierorazio PM, Pienta KJ, de Reijke TM, Amend SR.
Journal
Med Oncol
Abstract
Renal cell carcinoma is a lethal disease that is often discovered incidentally. New non-invasive bio (show more...)Renal cell carcinoma is a lethal disease that is often discovered incidentally. New non-invasive biomarkers are needed to aid diagnosis and treatment. Extracellular vesicles (EVs), membranous vesicles secreted by all cells, are a promising potential source for cancer biomarkers, but new methods are required that are both sensitive and specific for cancer identification. We have developed an EV isolation protocol optimized for kidney tumor and normal kidney tissue that yields a high vesicle concentration, confirmed by nanoparticle tracking analysis (NanoSight) and by nanoscale flow cytometry (NanoFCM). Using Western blot, we confirmed presence of EV markers CD81, CD63, flotillin-1, and absence of cellular debris, calnexin. Transmission electron microscopy images demonstrate intact membranous EVs. This new method improves existing protocols with additional steps to reduce contaminants in the EV product. Characterization of our isolation product confirms successful isolation of EVs with minimal contamination. The particle yields of our protocol are consistent and high as assessed by both standard and novel methods. This optimized protocol will contribute to biomarker discovery and biological studies of EVs in renal cancer. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (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
kidney tissue 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
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ CD63/ Flotillin1
non-EV: Calnexin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
New methodological development/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
kidney tissue supernatant
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting: time(min)
120
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 70 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
30
Wash: time (min)
120
Wash: Rotor Type
Type 70 Ti
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Filtration steps
> 0.45 µm, 0.45µm > x > 0.22µm,
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
BCA
Western Blot
Antibody details provided?
Yes