Search > Results

You searched for: 2024 (Year of publication)

Showing 1 - 50 of 164

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 ID Experiment nr. Species Sample type Separation protocol First author Year EV-METRIC
EV230597 1/9 Homo sapiens ESC (d)(U)C
DG
Chen Z 2024 100%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Chen Z, Luo L, Ye T, Zhou J, Niu X, Yuan J, Yuan T, Fu D, Li H, Li Q, Wang Y
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Pluripotent stem cell-derived small extracellular vesicles (PSC-sEVs) have demonstrated great clinic (show more...)Pluripotent stem cell-derived small extracellular vesicles (PSC-sEVs) have demonstrated great clinical translational potential in multiple aging-related degenerative diseases. Characterizing the PSC-sEVs is crucial for their clinical applications. However, the specific marker pattern of PSC-sEVs remains unknown. Here, the sEVs derived from two typical types of PSCs including induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC-sEVs) and embryonic stem cells (ESC-sEVs) were analysed using proteomic analysis by liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), and surface marker phenotyping analysis by nanoparticle flow cytometry (NanoFCM). A group of pluripotency-related proteins were found to be enriched in PSC-sEVs by LC-MS/MS and then validated by Western Blot analysis. To investigate whether these proteins were specifically expressed in PSC-sEVs, sEVs derived from seven types of non-PSCs (non-PSC-sEVs) were adopted for analysis. The results showed that PODXL, OCT4, Dnmt3a, and LIN28A were specifically enriched in PSC-sEVs but not in non-PSC-sEVs. Then, commonly used surface antigens for PSC identification (SSEA4, Tra-1-60 and Tra-1-81) and PODXL were gauged at single-particle resolution by NanoFCM for surface marker identification. The results showed that the positive rates of PODXL (>50%) and SSEA4 (>70%) in PSC-sEVs were much higher than those in non-PSC-sEVs (<10%). These results were further verified with samples purified by density gradient ultracentrifugation. Taken together, this study for the first time identified a cohort of specific markers for PSC-sEVs, among which PODXL, OCT4, Dnmt3a and LIN28A can be detected with Western Blot analysis, and PODXL and SSEA4 can be detected with NanoFCM analysis. The application of these specific markers for PSC-sEVs identification may advance the clinical translation of PSCs-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
Control condition
Focus vesicles
extracellular vesicle
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Density gradient
Adj. k-factor
37432 (washing)
Protein markers
EV: Alix/ CD9/ CD63/ TSG101/ CD81
non-EV: GM130/ Calnexin
Proteomics
yes
EV density (g/ml)
1.17
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
ESC
EV-harvesting Medium
Serum free medium
Cell count
2.00E+07
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 32 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
25
Wash: time (min)
70
Wash: Rotor Type
SW 32 Ti
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Wash: adjusted k-factor
37432
Density gradient
Only used for validation of main results
Yes
Type
Continuous
Lowest density fraction
20%
Highest density fraction
60%
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
11
Sample volume (mL)
1
Orientation
Top-down
Speed (g)
150000
Duration (min)
600
Fraction volume (mL)
1
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
10
Pelleting: speed (g)
150000
Pelleting: adjusted k-factor
10018
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
BCA
Protein Yield (µg)
per milliliter of starting sample
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
Alix/ CD9/ CD63/ TSG101
Not detected contaminants
GM130/ Calnexin
Flow cytometry
Type of Flow cytometry
Nano-flow Cytometry
Hardware adaptation to ~100nm EV's
By utilizing Rayleigh scattering
Calibration bead size
0.25
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD63/ CD81
Proteomics database
ProteomeXchange
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
Particle analysis: flow cytometry
Flow cytometer type
Nano-flow Cytometry
Hardware adjustment
By utilizing Rayleigh scattering
Calibration bead size
68/ 91,113,155
Report type
Size range/distribution
Reported size (nm)
40-150
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 2.03E+08
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
100
EV230597 2/9 Homo sapiens iPSC (d)(U)C
DG
Chen Z 2024 100%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Chen Z, Luo L, Ye T, Zhou J, Niu X, Yuan J, Yuan T, Fu D, Li H, Li Q, Wang Y
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Pluripotent stem cell-derived small extracellular vesicles (PSC-sEVs) have demonstrated great clinic (show more...)Pluripotent stem cell-derived small extracellular vesicles (PSC-sEVs) have demonstrated great clinical translational potential in multiple aging-related degenerative diseases. Characterizing the PSC-sEVs is crucial for their clinical applications. However, the specific marker pattern of PSC-sEVs remains unknown. Here, the sEVs derived from two typical types of PSCs including induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC-sEVs) and embryonic stem cells (ESC-sEVs) were analysed using proteomic analysis by liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), and surface marker phenotyping analysis by nanoparticle flow cytometry (NanoFCM). A group of pluripotency-related proteins were found to be enriched in PSC-sEVs by LC-MS/MS and then validated by Western Blot analysis. To investigate whether these proteins were specifically expressed in PSC-sEVs, sEVs derived from seven types of non-PSCs (non-PSC-sEVs) were adopted for analysis. The results showed that PODXL, OCT4, Dnmt3a, and LIN28A were specifically enriched in PSC-sEVs but not in non-PSC-sEVs. Then, commonly used surface antigens for PSC identification (SSEA4, Tra-1-60 and Tra-1-81) and PODXL were gauged at single-particle resolution by NanoFCM for surface marker identification. The results showed that the positive rates of PODXL (>50%) and SSEA4 (>70%) in PSC-sEVs were much higher than those in non-PSC-sEVs (<10%). These results were further verified with samples purified by density gradient ultracentrifugation. Taken together, this study for the first time identified a cohort of specific markers for PSC-sEVs, among which PODXL, OCT4, Dnmt3a and LIN28A can be detected with Western Blot analysis, and PODXL and SSEA4 can be detected with NanoFCM analysis. The application of these specific markers for PSC-sEVs identification may advance the clinical translation of PSCs-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
Control condition
Focus vesicles
extracellular vesicle
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Density gradient
Adj. k-factor
37432 (washing)
Protein markers
EV: TSG101/ CD9/ CD63/ CD81
non-EV: None
Proteomics
yes
EV density (g/ml)
1.17
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
iPSC
EV-harvesting Medium
Serum free medium
Cell count
2.00E+07
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 32 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
25
Wash: time (min)
70
Wash: Rotor Type
SW 32 Ti
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Wash: adjusted k-factor
37432
Density gradient
Only used for validation of main results
Yes
Type
Continuous
Lowest density fraction
20%
Highest density fraction
60%
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
11
Sample volume (mL)
1
Orientation
Top-down
Speed (g)
150000
Duration (min)
600
Fraction volume (mL)
1
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
10
Pelleting: speed (g)
150000
Pelleting: adjusted k-factor
10018
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
BCA
Protein Yield (µg)
per milliliter of starting sample
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
Alix/ CD9/ CD63/ TSG101
Not detected contaminants
GM130/ Calnexin
Flow cytometry
Type of Flow cytometry
Nano-flow Cytometry
Hardware adaptation to ~100nm EV's
By utilizing Rayleigh scattering
Calibration bead size
0.25
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD63/ CD81
Proteomics database
ProteomeXchange
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
Particle analysis: flow cytometry
Flow cytometer type
Nano-flow Cytometry
Hardware adjustment
By utilizing Rayleigh scattering
Calibration bead size
68/ 91,113,155
Report type
Size range/distribution
Reported size (nm)
40-150
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 2.03E+08
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
100
EV230372 7/14 Homo sapiens H2228 (d)(U)C
DG
Schöne N 2024 100%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Schöne N, Kemper M, Menck K, Evers G, Krekeler C, Schulze AB, Lenz G, Wardelmann E, Binder C, Bleckmann A
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). (show more...)Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). High expression of tissue PD-L1 (tPD-L1) is currently the only approved biomarker for predicting treatment response. However, even tPD-L1 low (1-49%) and absent (<1%) patients might benefit from immunotherapy but, to date, there is no reliable biomarker, that can predict response in this particular patient subgroup. This study aimed to test whether tumour-associated extracellular vesicles (EVs) could fill this gap. Using NSCLC cell lines, we identified a panel of tumour-related antigens that were enriched on large EVs (lEVs) compared to smaller EVs. The levels of lEVs carrying these antigens were significantly elevated in plasma of NSCLC patients (n = 108) and discriminated them from controls (n = 77). Among the tested antigens, we focused on programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1), which is a well-known direct target for immunotherapy. In plasma lEVs, PD-L1 was mainly found on a population of CD45 /CD62P lEVs and thus seemed to be associated with platelet-derived vesicles. Patients with high baseline levels of PD-L1 lEVs in blood showed a significantly better response to immunotherapy and prolonged survival. This was particularly true in the subgroup of NSCLC patients with low or absent tPD-L1 expression, thus identifying PD-L1-positive lEVs in plasma as a novel predictive and prognostic marker for immunotherapy. (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
large 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
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Density gradient
Protein markers
EV: Actinin-4/ Rgap1/ Syntenin-1/ CD81/ EMMPRIN/ EpCAM/ EGFR/ Mitofilin,Arf6
non-EV: GM130/ HDAC1/ Albumin/ ApoA1/ ApoB
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.10-1.17
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
H2228
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
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 32 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
17000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
1
Wash: time (min)
30
Wash: Rotor Type
Heraeus 3331
Wash: speed (g)
17000
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
Speed (g)
100000
Duration (min)
1080
Fraction volume (mL)
1
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
16
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Pelleting-wash: volume per pellet (mL)
16
Pelleting-wash: duration (min)
60
Pelleting-wash: speed (g)
SW 32 Ti
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Lowry-based assay
Protein Yield (µg)
per milliliter of starting sample
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
Actinin-4/ Rgap1/ Mitofilin/ Arf6/ CD81
Not detected EV-associated proteins
Syntenin
Not detected contaminants
GM130/ HDAC1/ Albumin/ ApoA1/ ApoB
Flow cytometry
Type of Flow cytometry
standard flow cytometer
Calibration bead size
0.2, 0.8
Detected EV-associated proteins
EMMPRIN/ EpCAM/ EGFR
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
196.8
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 4.83E+09
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV230372 9/14 Homo sapiens H596 (d)(U)C
DG
Schöne N 2024 100%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Schöne N, Kemper M, Menck K, Evers G, Krekeler C, Schulze AB, Lenz G, Wardelmann E, Binder C, Bleckmann A
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). (show more...)Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). High expression of tissue PD-L1 (tPD-L1) is currently the only approved biomarker for predicting treatment response. However, even tPD-L1 low (1-49%) and absent (<1%) patients might benefit from immunotherapy but, to date, there is no reliable biomarker, that can predict response in this particular patient subgroup. This study aimed to test whether tumour-associated extracellular vesicles (EVs) could fill this gap. Using NSCLC cell lines, we identified a panel of tumour-related antigens that were enriched on large EVs (lEVs) compared to smaller EVs. The levels of lEVs carrying these antigens were significantly elevated in plasma of NSCLC patients (n = 108) and discriminated them from controls (n = 77). Among the tested antigens, we focused on programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1), which is a well-known direct target for immunotherapy. In plasma lEVs, PD-L1 was mainly found on a population of CD45 /CD62P lEVs and thus seemed to be associated with platelet-derived vesicles. Patients with high baseline levels of PD-L1 lEVs in blood showed a significantly better response to immunotherapy and prolonged survival. This was particularly true in the subgroup of NSCLC patients with low or absent tPD-L1 expression, thus identifying PD-L1-positive lEVs in plasma as a novel predictive and prognostic marker for immunotherapy. (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
large 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
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Density gradient
Protein markers
EV: Actinin-4/ Rgap1/ Syntenin-1/ CD81/ EMMPRIN/ EpCAM/ EGFR/ Mitofilin,Arf6
non-EV: GM130/ HDAC1/ Albumin/ ApoA1/ ApoB
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.10-1.17
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
H596
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
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 32 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
17000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
1
Wash: time (min)
30
Wash: Rotor Type
Heraeus 3331
Wash: speed (g)
17000
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
Speed (g)
100000
Duration (min)
1080
Fraction volume (mL)
1
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
16
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Pelleting-wash: volume per pellet (mL)
16
Pelleting-wash: duration (min)
60
Pelleting-wash: speed (g)
SW 32 Ti
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Lowry-based assay
Protein Yield (µg)
per milliliter of starting sample
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
Actinin-4/ Rgap1/ Mitofilin/ Arf6
Not detected EV-associated proteins
Syntenin/ CD81
Not detected contaminants
GM130/ HDAC1/ Albumin/ ApoA1/ ApoB
Flow cytometry
Type of Flow cytometry
standard flow cytometer
Calibration bead size
0.2, 0.8
Detected EV-associated proteins
EMMPRIN/ EpCAM/ EGFR
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
188.7
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 1.33E+09
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV230372 13/14 Homo sapiens Blood plasma (d)(U)C Schöne N 2024 100%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Schöne N, Kemper M, Menck K, Evers G, Krekeler C, Schulze AB, Lenz G, Wardelmann E, Binder C, Bleckmann A
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). (show more...)Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). High expression of tissue PD-L1 (tPD-L1) is currently the only approved biomarker for predicting treatment response. However, even tPD-L1 low (1-49%) and absent (<1%) patients might benefit from immunotherapy but, to date, there is no reliable biomarker, that can predict response in this particular patient subgroup. This study aimed to test whether tumour-associated extracellular vesicles (EVs) could fill this gap. Using NSCLC cell lines, we identified a panel of tumour-related antigens that were enriched on large EVs (lEVs) compared to smaller EVs. The levels of lEVs carrying these antigens were significantly elevated in plasma of NSCLC patients (n = 108) and discriminated them from controls (n = 77). Among the tested antigens, we focused on programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1), which is a well-known direct target for immunotherapy. In plasma lEVs, PD-L1 was mainly found on a population of CD45 /CD62P lEVs and thus seemed to be associated with platelet-derived vesicles. Patients with high baseline levels of PD-L1 lEVs in blood showed a significantly better response to immunotherapy and prolonged survival. This was particularly true in the subgroup of NSCLC patients with low or absent tPD-L1 expression, thus identifying PD-L1-positive lEVs in plasma as a novel predictive and prognostic marker for immunotherapy. (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
NSCLC
Focus vesicles
large 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
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Protein markers
EV: Actinin-4/ Rgap1/ EMMPRIN/ EpCAM/ EGFR
non-EV: ApoA1/ ApoB
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.10-1.17
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Blood plasma
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 32 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
17000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
1
Wash: time (min)
30
Wash: Rotor Type
Heraeus 3331
Wash: speed (g)
17000
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
Speed (g)
100000
Duration (min)
1080
Fraction volume (mL)
1
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
16
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Pelleting-wash: volume per pellet (mL)
16
Pelleting-wash: duration (min)
60
Pelleting-wash: speed (g)
SW 32 Ti
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Lowry-based assay
Protein Yield (µg)
per milliliter of starting sample
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
Actinin-4/ Rgap1/ EMMPRIN
Detected contaminants
ApoB
Not detected contaminants
ApoA1
Flow cytometry
Type of Flow cytometry
standard flow cytometer
Calibration bead size
0.2, 0.8
Detected EV-associated proteins
EMMPRIN/ EpCAM/ EGFR
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
187
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 6.05E+08
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV220300 3/18 Homo sapiens MCF7 UF
(d)(U)C
Filtration
DG
SEC (non-commercial)
Pinheiro C 2024 100%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Pinheiro C, Guilbert N, Lippens L, Roux Q, Boiy R, Fischer S, Van Dorpe S, De Craene B, Berx G, Boterberg T, Sys G, Denys H, Miinalainen I, Mestdagh P, Vandesompele J, De Wever O, Hendrix A
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Extracellular vesicles (EVs) contain a plethora of biomolecules, including nucleic acids, with diver (show more...)Extracellular vesicles (EVs) contain a plethora of biomolecules, including nucleic acids, with diverse diagnostic and therapeutic application potential. Although reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) is the most widely applied laboratory technique to evaluate gene expression, its applicability in EV research is challenged by the lack of universal and stably present reference genes (RGs). In this study, we identify, validate and establish SNRPG, OST4, TOMM7 and NOP10 as RGs for the normalization of EV-associated genes by RT-qPCR. We show the stable presence of SNRPG, OST4, TOMM7 and NOP10 in multiple cell lines and their secreted EVs (n = 12) under different (patho)physiological conditions as well as in human-derived biofluids (n = 3). Enzymatic treatments confirm the presence of SNRPG, OST4, TOMM7 and NOP10 inside EVs. In addition, the four EV-associated RGs are stably detected in a size-range of EV subpopulations. RefFinder analysis reveals that SNRPG, OST4, TOMM7 and NOP10 are more stable compared to RGs established specifically for cultured cells or tissues such as HMBS, YWHAZ, SDHA and GAPDH. In summary, we present four universal and stably present EV-associated RGs to enable normalization and thus steer the implementation of RT-qPCR for the analysis of EV-associated RNA cargo for research or clinical applications. (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
Ultrafiltration
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Filtration
Density gradient
Size-exclusion chromatography (non-commercial)
Protein markers
EV: Alix/ CD9/ Flotillin-1/ TSG101/ Syntenin
non-EV: Argonaute 2
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.09-1.11
Show all info
Study aim
Validation of standards
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
MCF7
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
>=18h at >= 100,000g
Cell viability (%)
96
Cell count
4.43e8
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Pelleting performed
No
Density gradient
Type
Discontinuous
Number of initial discontinuous layers
4
Lowest density fraction
5%
Highest density fraction
40%
Total gradient volume, incl. sample (mL)
15.5
Sample volume (mL)
1
Orientation
Top-down
Speed (g)
100000
Duration (min)
1080
Fraction volume (mL)
1
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
16
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Filtration steps
Between 0.22 and 0.45 _m
Ultra filtration
Cut-off size (kDa)
10 kDa
Membrane type
Regenerated cellulose
Size-exclusion chromatography
Resin type
EV-subtype
Distinction between multiple subtypes
Size
Used subtypes
120-250
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
Protein Yield (µg)
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 1.54E11-2.60E11
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
Alix/ CD9/ Flotillinð1/ TSG101/ Syntenin
Not detected contaminants
Argonauteð2
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)(q)PCR
Proteinase treatment
Yes
Moment of Proteinase treatment
After
Proteinase type
Proteinase K
Proteinase concentration
2
RNAse treatment
Yes
RNAse type
RNase A
RNAse concentration
8
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
125.7-134.7
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 1.54E11-2.60E11
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Wide-field
EV230996 1/5 Homo sapiens HEK293F (d)(U)C
DC
Filtration
UF
SEC (non-commercial)
Vo N 2024 89%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Vo N, Tran C, Tran NHB, Nguyen NT, Nguyen T, Ho DTK, Nguyen DDN, Pham T, Nguyen TA, Phan HTN, Nguyen HN, Tu LN
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are emerging as a promising drug delivery vehicle as they are biocompat (show more...)Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are emerging as a promising drug delivery vehicle as they are biocompatible and capable of targeted delivery. However, clinical translation of EVs remains challenging due to the lack of standardized and scalable manufacturing protocols to consistently isolate small EVs (sEVs) with both high yield and high purity. The heterogenous nature of sEVs leading to unknown composition of biocargos causes further pushback due to safety concerns. In order to address these issues, we developed a robust quality-controlled multi-stage process to produce and isolate sEVs from human embryonic kidney HEK293F cells. We then compared different 2-step and 3-step workflows for eliminating protein impurities and cell-free nucleic acids to meet acceptable limits of regulatory authorities. Our results showed that sEV production was maximized when HEK293F cells were grown at high-density stationary phase in semi-continuous culture. The novel 3-step workflow combining tangential flow filtration, sucrose-cushion ultracentrifugation and bind-elute size-exclusion chromatography outperformed other methods in sEV purity while still preserved high yield and particle integrity. The purified HEK293F-derived sEVs were thoroughly characterized for identity including sub-population analysis, content profiling including proteomics and miRNA sequencing, and demonstrated excellent preclinical safety profile in both in-vitro and in-vivo testing. Our rigorous enrichment workflow and comprehensive characterization will help advance the development of EVs, particularly HEK293F-derived sEVs, to be safe and reliable drug carriers for therapeutic applications. (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
Cell culture supernatant
Sample origin
Control condition
Focus vesicles
extracellular vesicle
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Density cushion
Filtration
Ultrafiltration
Size-exclusion chromatography (non-commercial)
Protein markers
EV: CD9/ CD81/ TSG101/ CD63
non-EV: CANX
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
New methodological development/Identification of content (omics approaches)/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
HEK293F
EV-harvesting Medium
Serum free medium
Cell count
3.00E+06
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 50.2 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
120000
Filtration steps
0.2 or 0.22 µm
Ultra filtration
Cut-off size (kDa)
300
Membrane type
Polyethersulfone (PES)
Density cushion
Density medium
Sucrose
Sample volume
20
Cushion volume
5
Density of the cushion
30%
Centrifugation time
240
Centrifugation speed
120,000
Size-exclusion chromatography
Total column volume (mL)
5
Sample volume/column (mL)
50
Resin type
None of these
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
BCA
Protein Yield (µg)
per milliliter of starting sample
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD81/ TSG101
Not detected contaminants
CANX
Proteomics database
Vesiclepedia #3590
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD63/ CD81/ TSG101
Not detected contaminants
CANX
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
RNA-sequencing
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
Yes
RNAse type
Benzonase
RNAse concentration
20U/100ml
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Size range/distribution
Reported size (nm)
164.3+/-84.2
EM
EM-type
Scanning-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
52.6+/-25.8
Other particle analysis name(3)
Exoview
Report type
Size range/distribution
EV-concentration
Yes
Particle yield
as number of particles per milliliter of starting sample: 1E13/L
EV220300 4/18 Homo sapiens A549 UF
(d)(U)C
Filtration
DG
Pinheiro C 2024 89%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Pinheiro C, Guilbert N, Lippens L, Roux Q, Boiy R, Fischer S, Van Dorpe S, De Craene B, Berx G, Boterberg T, Sys G, Denys H, Miinalainen I, Mestdagh P, Vandesompele J, De Wever O, Hendrix A
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Extracellular vesicles (EVs) contain a plethora of biomolecules, including nucleic acids, with diver (show more...)Extracellular vesicles (EVs) contain a plethora of biomolecules, including nucleic acids, with diverse diagnostic and therapeutic application potential. Although reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) is the most widely applied laboratory technique to evaluate gene expression, its applicability in EV research is challenged by the lack of universal and stably present reference genes (RGs). In this study, we identify, validate and establish SNRPG, OST4, TOMM7 and NOP10 as RGs for the normalization of EV-associated genes by RT-qPCR. We show the stable presence of SNRPG, OST4, TOMM7 and NOP10 in multiple cell lines and their secreted EVs (n = 12) under different (patho)physiological conditions as well as in human-derived biofluids (n = 3). Enzymatic treatments confirm the presence of SNRPG, OST4, TOMM7 and NOP10 inside EVs. In addition, the four EV-associated RGs are stably detected in a size-range of EV subpopulations. RefFinder analysis reveals that SNRPG, OST4, TOMM7 and NOP10 are more stable compared to RGs established specifically for cultured cells or tissues such as HMBS, YWHAZ, SDHA and GAPDH. In summary, we present four universal and stably present EV-associated RGs to enable normalization and thus steer the implementation of RT-qPCR for the analysis of EV-associated RNA cargo for research or clinical applications. (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
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
Ultrafiltration
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Filtration
Density gradient
Protein markers
EV: Alix/ CD9/ TSG101
non-EV: None
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.09-1.11
Show all info
Study aim
Validation of standards
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
A549
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
>=18h at >= 100,000g
Cell viability (%)
93
Cell count
1.09e8
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
SW32.1 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)
15.5
Sample volume (mL)
1
Orientation
Top-down
Speed (g)
100000
Duration (min)
1080
Fraction volume (mL)
1
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
16
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Filtration steps
Between 0.22 and 0.45 _m
Ultra filtration
Cut-off size (kDa)
10 kDa
Membrane type
Regenerated cellulose
Size-exclusion chromatography
Resin type
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
Protein Yield (µg)
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 9.88E10
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
Alix/ CD9/ TSG101
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)(q)PCR
Proteinase treatment
No
RNAse treatment
No
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
186.1
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 9.88E10
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV240026 1/2 Homo sapiens Human Wharton's Jelly-Mesenchymal Stromal Cells (d)(U)C Seydi H 2024 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Seydi H, Nouri K, Shokouhian B, Piryaei A, Hassan M, Cordani M, Zarrabi A, Shekari F, Vosough M
Journal
Eur J Pharm Biopharm
Abstract
In spite of significant advancements in theraputic modalities for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), th (show more...)In spite of significant advancements in theraputic modalities for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), there is still a high annual mortality rate with a rising incidence. Major challenges in the HCC clinical managment are related to the development of therapy resistance, and evasion of tumor cells apoptosis which leading unsatisfactory outcomes in HCC patients. Previous investigations have shown that autophagy plays crucial role in contributing to drug resistance development in HCC. Although, miR-29a is known to counteract authophagy, increasing evidence revealed a down-regulation of miR-29a in HCC patients which correlates with poor prognosis. Beside, evidences showed that miR-29a serves as a negative regulator of autophagy in other cancers. In the current study, we aim to investigate the impact of miR-29a on the autophagy and apoptosis in HCC cells using extracellular vesicles (EVs) as a natural delivery system given their potential in the miRNA delivery both in vitro and in vivo. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (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
EV20K
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Protein markers
EV: CD9/ CD63/ CD81/ TSG101
non-EV: Albumin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
Human Wharton's Jelly-Mesenchymal Stromal Cells
EV-harvesting Medium
Serum-containing medium
Cell viability (%)
87
Cell count
4000000000
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
NA-1HS
Pelleting: speed (g)
20000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
1
Wash: time (min)
30
Wash: Rotor Type
NA-1HS
Wash: speed (g)
20000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
BCA
Protein Yield (µg)
per million cells
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD63/ CD81/ TSG101
Not detected contaminants
Albumin
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)(q)PCR
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
DLS
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
332
EM
EM-type
Scanning-EM
Image type
Wide-field
Report size (nm)
250.77
EV240026 2/2 Homo sapiens Human Wharton's Jelly-Mesenchymal Stromal Cells (d)(U)C Seydi H 2024 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Seydi H, Nouri K, Shokouhian B, Piryaei A, Hassan M, Cordani M, Zarrabi A, Shekari F, Vosough M
Journal
Eur J Pharm Biopharm
Abstract
In spite of significant advancements in theraputic modalities for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), th (show more...)In spite of significant advancements in theraputic modalities for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), there is still a high annual mortality rate with a rising incidence. Major challenges in the HCC clinical managment are related to the development of therapy resistance, and evasion of tumor cells apoptosis which leading unsatisfactory outcomes in HCC patients. Previous investigations have shown that autophagy plays crucial role in contributing to drug resistance development in HCC. Although, miR-29a is known to counteract authophagy, increasing evidence revealed a down-regulation of miR-29a in HCC patients which correlates with poor prognosis. Beside, evidences showed that miR-29a serves as a negative regulator of autophagy in other cancers. In the current study, we aim to investigate the impact of miR-29a on the autophagy and apoptosis in HCC cells using extracellular vesicles (EVs) as a natural delivery system given their potential in the miRNA delivery both in vitro and in vivo. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (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
EV110K
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Protein markers
EV: CD9/ CD63/ CD81/ TSG101
non-EV: Albumin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
Human Wharton's Jelly-Mesenchymal Stromal Cells
EV-harvesting Medium
Serum-containing medium
Cell viability (%)
87
Cell count
4000000000
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 32 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
110000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
1
Wash: time (min)
120
Wash: Rotor Type
SW 32 Ti
Wash: speed (g)
110000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
BCA
Protein Yield (µg)
per million cells
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD63/ CD81/ TSG101
Not detected contaminants
Albumin
Characterization: RNA analysis
RNA analysis
Type
(RT)(q)PCR
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
DLS
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
239
EM
EM-type
Scanning-EM
Image type
Wide-field
EV231013 1/5 Homo sapiens Blood plasma (d)(U)C Robinson, Stephen 2024 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Stephen David Robinson, Mark Samuels, William Jones, Nicolas Stewart, Murat Eravci, Nektarios K Mazarakis, Duncan Gilbert, Giles Critchley, Georgios Giamas 
Journal
Abstract
Background Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are amongst the most promising candidates for developing bl (show more...)Background Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are amongst the most promising candidates for developing blood-based biomarkers. However, patient sample availability is a key barrier to translational research whilst most biobanks store samples of 1.5mL volume or less. To date, there is no consensus on the most suitable method of EV separation and current techniques frequently require large volumes of biofluids, complicated technology, technical expertise, or significant operating costs, which prevents their widespread adoption by less EV-focussed laboratories. Therefore, there is a need for an easy and reproducible method that separates representative EVs from clinically relevant 1mL volumes of plasma prior to subsequent biomarker identification. Methods In this study, EVs were separated from a clinically relevant 1mL volume of human plasma using four different separation techniques: size exclusion chromatography (SEC), differential ultracentrifugation, precipitation, and immunoaffinity magnetic bead capture. The EVs were characterised using several orthogonal techniques (protein quantification, nanoparticle tracking analysis, transmission electron microscopy, Western blot, single particle interferometric reflectance imaging sensing, and mass spectrometry-based proteomics) to comprehensively compare the separated samples. Results We provide examples of anticipated results highlighting that SEC-processed samples have greater protein quantification yield, greater particle yield of the expected size for EVs, and sufficient EV purity, which facilitates effective EV cargo assessment by proteomics. Moreover, we confirm significant overlap with known EV-related proteins within the Vesiclepedia database. Additionally, using single particle interferometric reflectance imaging sensing (Leprechaun®), we identify that SEC has the most representative surface tetraspanin distribution of the separated EV population compared to unprocessed plasma. Discussion Given that SEC requires minimal expertise, no complicated technology and can separate EVs within 90 min, this comparison reinforces SEC as a clinically relevant EV separation method from 1mL of plasma making it suitable for widespread implementation. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (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
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
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Protein markers
EV: CD9/ CD63/ CD81/ HSP70/ TSG101/ Syntenin
non-EV: Albumin/ GM130/ ApoA1/ ApoB/ ApoE
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Blood plasma
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 70 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
100,000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
10
Wash: time (min)
90
Wash: Rotor Type
Type 70 Ti
Wash: speed (g)
100,000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
microBCA
Protein Yield (µg)
per milliliter of starting sample
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD63/ CD81/ HSP70/ TSG101/ Syntenin
Detected contaminants
ApoB/ ApoE
Not detected contaminants
Albumin/ GM130/ ApoA1
Detected contaminants
Albumin
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD63/ CD81
Characterization: Lipid analysis
Yes
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
136
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 1.50E+10
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Other particle analysis name(3)
Single particle interferometric reflectance imaging sensing (Leprechaun)
Report type
Mean
EV231013 4/5 Homo sapiens Blood plasma (d)(U)C
Filtration
Robinson, Stephen 2024 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Stephen David Robinson, Mark Samuels, William Jones, Nicolas Stewart, Murat Eravci, Nektarios K Mazarakis, Duncan Gilbert, Giles Critchley, Georgios Giamas 
Journal
Abstract
Background Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are amongst the most promising candidates for developing bl (show more...)Background Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are amongst the most promising candidates for developing blood-based biomarkers. However, patient sample availability is a key barrier to translational research whilst most biobanks store samples of 1.5mL volume or less. To date, there is no consensus on the most suitable method of EV separation and current techniques frequently require large volumes of biofluids, complicated technology, technical expertise, or significant operating costs, which prevents their widespread adoption by less EV-focussed laboratories. Therefore, there is a need for an easy and reproducible method that separates representative EVs from clinically relevant 1mL volumes of plasma prior to subsequent biomarker identification. Methods In this study, EVs were separated from a clinically relevant 1mL volume of human plasma using four different separation techniques: size exclusion chromatography (SEC), differential ultracentrifugation, precipitation, and immunoaffinity magnetic bead capture. The EVs were characterised using several orthogonal techniques (protein quantification, nanoparticle tracking analysis, transmission electron microscopy, Western blot, single particle interferometric reflectance imaging sensing, and mass spectrometry-based proteomics) to comprehensively compare the separated samples. Results We provide examples of anticipated results highlighting that SEC-processed samples have greater protein quantification yield, greater particle yield of the expected size for EVs, and sufficient EV purity, which facilitates effective EV cargo assessment by proteomics. Moreover, we confirm significant overlap with known EV-related proteins within the Vesiclepedia database. Additionally, using single particle interferometric reflectance imaging sensing (Leprechaun®), we identify that SEC has the most representative surface tetraspanin distribution of the separated EV population compared to unprocessed plasma. Discussion Given that SEC requires minimal expertise, no complicated technology and can separate EVs within 90 min, this comparison reinforces SEC as a clinically relevant EV separation method from 1mL of plasma making it suitable for widespread implementation. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (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
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
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Filtration
Protein markers
EV: CD9/ CD63/ CD81/ HSP70/ TSG101/ Syntenin
non-EV: GM130/ ApoA1/ Albumin/ ApoB/ ApoE
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Blood plasma
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 70 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
100,000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
10
Wash: time (min)
90
Wash: Rotor Type
Type 70 Ti
Wash: speed (g)
100,000
Filtration steps
0.2 or 0.22 ðm
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
microBCA
Protein Yield (µg)
per milliliter of starting sample
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD63/ CD81/ HSP70/ TSG101/ Syntenin
Detected contaminants
Albumin/ ApoB/ ApoE
Not detected contaminants
GM130/ ApoA1
Detected contaminants
Albumin
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD63/ CD81
Characterization: Lipid analysis
Yes
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
128
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 1.15E+10
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Other particle analysis name(3)
Single particle interferometric reflectance imaging sensing (Leprechaun)
Report type
Mean
EV230598 1/3 Homo sapiens Milk (d)(U)C Ten-Doménech, Isabel 2024 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Isabel Ten-Doménech, Victoria Ramos-Garcia, Abel Albiach-Delgado, Jose Luis Moreno-Casillas, Alba Moreno-Giménez, María Gormaz, Marta Gómez-Ferrer, Pilar Sepúlveda, Máximo Vento, Guillermo Quintás, Julia Kuligowski
Journal
Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems
Abstract
Human milk (HM) extracellular vesicles (EVs) are nano-sized, cell-derived particles sheathed in a li (show more...)Human milk (HM) extracellular vesicles (EVs) are nano-sized, cell-derived particles sheathed in a lipid bilayer that encase specific cargo for delivery from mother to infant. The aim of this study was to expand our understanding of the lipidomic fingerprint of HM-EVs, with a specific focus on the impact of data normalization using simulated and experimental data obtained from the analysis of HM samples from mothers of preterm (N = 5) and term infants (N = 5), and a pool of donor human milk from 20 mothers (before and after pasteurization). EVs were isolated by multi-stage ultracentrifugation and characterized in terms of total protein content, total particle count and size, surface tetraspanin profile and protein markers, and morphology. Lipidomic analysis after single-phase extraction was performed by liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LC-MS). The effect of widely used data normalization strategies (i.e., sample volume, particle count, protein content, total lipids signal) was compared. Results show that for the selection of the optimum normalization approach, the specific study aims, as well as the purity and homogeneity of size distribution of EV isolates should be considered. While normalization attending the particle number can be useful for between sample comparisons in EV populations with similar particle size, normalization to total lipid content is preferred when lipid contamination is encountered. Our findings exemplify the need for guidance with respect to data processing in LC-MS-based lipidomics studies of EVs. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (86th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type)
 Reported
 Not reported
 Not applicable
EV-enriched proteins
Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins
non EV-enriched protein
Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein
qualitative and quantitative analysis
Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. 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
Milk
Sample origin
Mothers of preterm infants
Focus vesicles
extracellular vesicle
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Protein markers
EV: CD9/ CD63/ CD81/ HSP70
non-EV: Calnexin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Milk
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 50.2 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
108763
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
25
Wash: time (min)
120
Wash: Rotor Type
Type 50.2 Ti
Wash: speed (g)
108763
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
BCA
Protein Yield (µg)
per milliliter of EV isolate
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD63/ CD81/ HSP70
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD63/ CD81
Characterization: Lipid analysis
Yes
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
168-238
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
as number of particles per milliliter of EV isolate: 1.4E10-1.4E12
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Other particle analysis name(1)
ExoView
Report type
Mean
Report size
58-70
EV-concentration
Yes
Particle yield
as number of particles per milliliter of EV isolate: 6E07-3E08
EV230372 3/14 Homo sapiens HCC-78 (d)(U)C
DG
Schöne N 2024 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Schöne N, Kemper M, Menck K, Evers G, Krekeler C, Schulze AB, Lenz G, Wardelmann E, Binder C, Bleckmann A
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). (show more...)Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). High expression of tissue PD-L1 (tPD-L1) is currently the only approved biomarker for predicting treatment response. However, even tPD-L1 low (1-49%) and absent (<1%) patients might benefit from immunotherapy but, to date, there is no reliable biomarker, that can predict response in this particular patient subgroup. This study aimed to test whether tumour-associated extracellular vesicles (EVs) could fill this gap. Using NSCLC cell lines, we identified a panel of tumour-related antigens that were enriched on large EVs (lEVs) compared to smaller EVs. The levels of lEVs carrying these antigens were significantly elevated in plasma of NSCLC patients (n = 108) and discriminated them from controls (n = 77). Among the tested antigens, we focused on programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1), which is a well-known direct target for immunotherapy. In plasma lEVs, PD-L1 was mainly found on a population of CD45 /CD62P lEVs and thus seemed to be associated with platelet-derived vesicles. Patients with high baseline levels of PD-L1 lEVs in blood showed a significantly better response to immunotherapy and prolonged survival. This was particularly true in the subgroup of NSCLC patients with low or absent tPD-L1 expression, thus identifying PD-L1-positive lEVs in plasma as a novel predictive and prognostic marker for immunotherapy. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (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
large 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
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Density gradient
Protein markers
EV: Actinin-4/ Rgap1/ Syntenin-1/ CD81/ EMMPRIN/ EpCAM/ EGFR/ Mitofilin,Arf6
non-EV: GM130/ HDAC1/ Albumin/ ApoA1/ ApoB
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.10-1.17
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
HCC-78
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
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 32 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
17000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
1
Wash: time (min)
30
Wash: Rotor Type
Heraeus 3331
Wash: speed (g)
17000
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
Speed (g)
100000
Duration (min)
1080
Fraction volume (mL)
1
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
16
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Pelleting-wash: volume per pellet (mL)
16
Pelleting-wash: duration (min)
60
Pelleting-wash: speed (g)
SW 32 Ti
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Lowry-based assay
Protein Yield (µg)
per milliliter of starting sample
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
Actinin-4/ Rgap1/ Syntenin-1/ Arf6/ Mitofilin
Not detected EV-associated proteins
CD81
Not detected contaminants
GM130/ HDAC1/ Albumin/ ApoA1/ ApoB
Flow cytometry
Type of Flow cytometry
standard flow cytometer
Calibration bead size
0.2, 0.8
Detected EV-associated proteins
EMMPRIN/ EpCAM/ EGFR
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
200.13
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 5.63E+09
EV230372 8/14 Homo sapiens H2228 (d)(U)C Schöne N 2024 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Schöne N, Kemper M, Menck K, Evers G, Krekeler C, Schulze AB, Lenz G, Wardelmann E, Binder C, Bleckmann A
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). (show more...)Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). High expression of tissue PD-L1 (tPD-L1) is currently the only approved biomarker for predicting treatment response. However, even tPD-L1 low (1-49%) and absent (<1%) patients might benefit from immunotherapy but, to date, there is no reliable biomarker, that can predict response in this particular patient subgroup. This study aimed to test whether tumour-associated extracellular vesicles (EVs) could fill this gap. Using NSCLC cell lines, we identified a panel of tumour-related antigens that were enriched on large EVs (lEVs) compared to smaller EVs. The levels of lEVs carrying these antigens were significantly elevated in plasma of NSCLC patients (n = 108) and discriminated them from controls (n = 77). Among the tested antigens, we focused on programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1), which is a well-known direct target for immunotherapy. In plasma lEVs, PD-L1 was mainly found on a population of CD45 /CD62P lEVs and thus seemed to be associated with platelet-derived vesicles. Patients with high baseline levels of PD-L1 lEVs in blood showed a significantly better response to immunotherapy and prolonged survival. This was particularly true in the subgroup of NSCLC patients with low or absent tPD-L1 expression, thus identifying PD-L1-positive lEVs in plasma as a novel predictive and prognostic marker for immunotherapy. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (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
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
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ Syntenin/ Actinin-4/ Arf6/ Rgap1/ Mitofilin
non-EV: GM130/ HDAC1/ Albumin/ ApoA1/ ApoB
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
H2228
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 performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 32 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
143000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
1.4
Wash: time (min)
90
Wash: Rotor Type
TLA-55
Wash: speed (g)
143000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Lowry-based assay
Protein Yield (µg)
per milliliter of starting sample
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
Syntenin/ Arf6/ CD81
Not detected EV-associated proteins
Actinin-4/ Rgap1/ Mitofilin
Not detected contaminants
GM130/ HDAC1/ Albumin/ ApoA1/ ApoB
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
163.8
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 2.10E+10
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV230372 10/14 Homo sapiens H596 (d)(U)C
DG
Schöne N 2024 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Schöne N, Kemper M, Menck K, Evers G, Krekeler C, Schulze AB, Lenz G, Wardelmann E, Binder C, Bleckmann A
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). (show more...)Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). High expression of tissue PD-L1 (tPD-L1) is currently the only approved biomarker for predicting treatment response. However, even tPD-L1 low (1-49%) and absent (<1%) patients might benefit from immunotherapy but, to date, there is no reliable biomarker, that can predict response in this particular patient subgroup. This study aimed to test whether tumour-associated extracellular vesicles (EVs) could fill this gap. Using NSCLC cell lines, we identified a panel of tumour-related antigens that were enriched on large EVs (lEVs) compared to smaller EVs. The levels of lEVs carrying these antigens were significantly elevated in plasma of NSCLC patients (n = 108) and discriminated them from controls (n = 77). Among the tested antigens, we focused on programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1), which is a well-known direct target for immunotherapy. In plasma lEVs, PD-L1 was mainly found on a population of CD45 /CD62P lEVs and thus seemed to be associated with platelet-derived vesicles. Patients with high baseline levels of PD-L1 lEVs in blood showed a significantly better response to immunotherapy and prolonged survival. This was particularly true in the subgroup of NSCLC patients with low or absent tPD-L1 expression, thus identifying PD-L1-positive lEVs in plasma as a novel predictive and prognostic marker for immunotherapy. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (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
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
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Density gradient
Protein markers
EV: CD81/ Syntenin/ Actinin-4/ Arf6/ Rgap1/ Mitofilin
non-EV: GM130/ HDAC1/ Albumin/ ApoA1/ ApoB
Proteomics
no
EV density (g/ml)
1.10-1.17
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
H596
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 performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 32 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
143000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
1.4
Wash: time (min)
90
Wash: Rotor Type
TLA-55
Wash: speed (g)
143000
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
Speed (g)
100000
Duration (min)
1080
Fraction volume (mL)
1
Fraction processing
Centrifugation
Pelleting: volume per fraction
16
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Pelleting-wash: volume per pellet (mL)
16
Pelleting-wash: duration (min)
60
Pelleting-wash: speed (g)
SW 32 Ti
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Lowry-based assay
Protein Yield (µg)
per milliliter of starting sample
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
Syntenin/ Actinin-4/ Arf6/ CD81
Not detected EV-associated proteins
Rgap1/ Mitofilin
Not detected contaminants
GM130/ HDAC1/ Albumin/ ApoA1/ ApoB
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
141.2
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 6.09E+09
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV220326 1/4 Homo sapiens Glioblastoma stem-like cells NCH421k (d)(U)C
DC
Lokumcu T 2024 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Lokumcu T, Iskar M, Schneider M, Helm D, Klinke G, Schlicker L, Bethke F, Müller G, Richter K, Poschet G, Phillips E, Goidts V
Journal
ACS Nano
Abstract
Glioblastoma is a deadly brain tumor for which there is no cure. The presence of glioblastoma stem-l (show more...)Glioblastoma is a deadly brain tumor for which there is no cure. The presence of glioblastoma stem-like cells (GSCs) contributes to the heterogeneous nature of the disease and makes developing effective therapies challenging. Glioblastoma cells have been shown to influence their environment by releasing biological nanostructures known as extracellular vesicles (EVs). Here, we investigated the role of GSC-derived nanosized EVs (<200 nm) in glioblastoma heterogeneity, plasticity, and aggressiveness, with a particular focus on their protein, metabolite, and fatty acid content. We showed that conditioned medium and small extracellular vesicles (sEVs) derived from cells of one glioblastoma subtype induced transcriptomic and proteomic changes in cells of another subtype. We found that GSC-derived sEVs are enriched in proteins playing a role in the transmembrane transport of amino acids, carboxylic acids, and organic acids, growth factor binding, and metabolites associated with amino acid, carboxylic acid, and sugar metabolism. This suggests a dual role of GSC-derived sEVs in supplying neighboring GSCs with valuable metabolites and proteins responsible for their transport. Moreover, GSC-derived sEVs were enriched in saturated fatty acids, while their respective cells were high in unsaturated fatty acids, supporting that the loading of biological cargos into sEVs is a highly regulated process and that GSC-derived sEVs could be sources of saturated fatty acids for the maintenance of glioblastoma cell metabolism. Interestingly, sEVs isolated from GSCs of the proneural and mesenchymal subtypes are enriched in specific sets of proteins, metabolites, and fatty acids, suggesting a molecular collaboration between transcriptionally different glioblastoma cells. In summary, this study revealed the complexity of GSC-derived sEVs and unveiled their potential contribution to tumor heterogeneity and critical cellular processes commonly deregulated in glioblastoma. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (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
small extracellular vesicles (sEVs)
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Density cushion
Protein markers
EV: Alix/ CD9/ TSG101/ Syndecan-1/ Enolase 1
non-EV: Albumin/ Calreticulin/ Calnexin/ Argonaute-2/ GM130/ PMP70/ Prohibitin/ Tamm-Horsfall protein/ Cytochrome c1/ Lamin B1/ 60S acidic ribosomal protein P0
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
Glioblastoma stem-like cells NCH421k
EV-harvesting Medium
Serum free medium
Cell viability (%)
91 - 93
Cell count
194200000 - 222312000
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 28
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
10
Wash: time (min)
70
Wash: Rotor Type
SW 40 Ti
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Density cushion
Density medium
Iodixanol
Sample volume
7
Cushion volume
4
Density of the cushion
20%
Centrifugation time
70
Centrifugation speed
100000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Fluorometric assay
Protein Yield (µg)
per million cells
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
Alix/ CD9/ TSG101/ Syndecan-1/ Enolase 1
Detected contaminants
60S acidic ribosomal protein P0 (RPLP0)
Not detected contaminants
GM130/ Lamin B1/ Cytochrome c
Proteomics database
ProteomeXchange
Detected contaminants
Albumin/ Calreticulin/ Calnexin
Not detected contaminants
Argonaute 2/ GM130/ PMP70/ Prohibitin/ Tamm-Horsfall protein/ Cytochrome c1
Characterization: Lipid analysis
Yes
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
175.0
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 4,58E+12
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV220326 2/4 Homo sapiens Glioblastoma stem-like cells NCH644 (d)(U)C
DC
Lokumcu T 2024 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Lokumcu T, Iskar M, Schneider M, Helm D, Klinke G, Schlicker L, Bethke F, Müller G, Richter K, Poschet G, Phillips E, Goidts V
Journal
ACS Nano
Abstract
Glioblastoma is a deadly brain tumor for which there is no cure. The presence of glioblastoma stem-l (show more...)Glioblastoma is a deadly brain tumor for which there is no cure. The presence of glioblastoma stem-like cells (GSCs) contributes to the heterogeneous nature of the disease and makes developing effective therapies challenging. Glioblastoma cells have been shown to influence their environment by releasing biological nanostructures known as extracellular vesicles (EVs). Here, we investigated the role of GSC-derived nanosized EVs (<200 nm) in glioblastoma heterogeneity, plasticity, and aggressiveness, with a particular focus on their protein, metabolite, and fatty acid content. We showed that conditioned medium and small extracellular vesicles (sEVs) derived from cells of one glioblastoma subtype induced transcriptomic and proteomic changes in cells of another subtype. We found that GSC-derived sEVs are enriched in proteins playing a role in the transmembrane transport of amino acids, carboxylic acids, and organic acids, growth factor binding, and metabolites associated with amino acid, carboxylic acid, and sugar metabolism. This suggests a dual role of GSC-derived sEVs in supplying neighboring GSCs with valuable metabolites and proteins responsible for their transport. Moreover, GSC-derived sEVs were enriched in saturated fatty acids, while their respective cells were high in unsaturated fatty acids, supporting that the loading of biological cargos into sEVs is a highly regulated process and that GSC-derived sEVs could be sources of saturated fatty acids for the maintenance of glioblastoma cell metabolism. Interestingly, sEVs isolated from GSCs of the proneural and mesenchymal subtypes are enriched in specific sets of proteins, metabolites, and fatty acids, suggesting a molecular collaboration between transcriptionally different glioblastoma cells. In summary, this study revealed the complexity of GSC-derived sEVs and unveiled their potential contribution to tumor heterogeneity and critical cellular processes commonly deregulated in glioblastoma. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (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
small extracellular vesicles (sEVs)
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Density cushion
Protein markers
EV: Alix/ CD9/ TSG101/ Syndecan-1/ Enolase 1
non-EV: Albumin/ Calreticulin/ Calnexin/ Argonaute-2/ GM130/ PMP70/ Prohibitin/ Tamm-Horsfall protein/ Cytochrome c1/ Lamin B1/ 60S acidic ribosomal protein P0
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
Glioblastoma stem-like cells NCH644
EV-harvesting Medium
Serum free medium
Cell viability (%)
83 - 90
Cell count
225576000 - 231070000
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 28
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
10
Wash: time (min)
70
Wash: Rotor Type
SW 40 Ti
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Density cushion
Density medium
Iodixanol
Sample volume
7
Cushion volume
4
Density of the cushion
20%
Centrifugation time
70
Centrifugation speed
100000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Fluorometric assay
Protein Yield (µg)
per million cells
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
Alix/ CD9/ TSG101/ Syndecan-1/ Enolase 1
Detected contaminants
60S acidic ribosomal protein P0
Not detected contaminants
GM130/ Lamin B1/ Cytochrome c
Proteomics database
ProteomeXchange
Detected contaminants
Albumin/ Calreticulin/ Calnexin
Not detected contaminants
Argonaute 2/ GM130/ PMP70/ Prohibitin/ Tamm-Horsfall protein/ Cytochrome c1
Characterization: Lipid analysis
Yes
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
169.7
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 1,87E+12
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV220326 3/4 Homo sapiens Glioblastoma stem-like cells NCH705 (d)(U)C
DC
Lokumcu T 2024 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Lokumcu T, Iskar M, Schneider M, Helm D, Klinke G, Schlicker L, Bethke F, Müller G, Richter K, Poschet G, Phillips E, Goidts V
Journal
ACS Nano
Abstract
Glioblastoma is a deadly brain tumor for which there is no cure. The presence of glioblastoma stem-l (show more...)Glioblastoma is a deadly brain tumor for which there is no cure. The presence of glioblastoma stem-like cells (GSCs) contributes to the heterogeneous nature of the disease and makes developing effective therapies challenging. Glioblastoma cells have been shown to influence their environment by releasing biological nanostructures known as extracellular vesicles (EVs). Here, we investigated the role of GSC-derived nanosized EVs (<200 nm) in glioblastoma heterogeneity, plasticity, and aggressiveness, with a particular focus on their protein, metabolite, and fatty acid content. We showed that conditioned medium and small extracellular vesicles (sEVs) derived from cells of one glioblastoma subtype induced transcriptomic and proteomic changes in cells of another subtype. We found that GSC-derived sEVs are enriched in proteins playing a role in the transmembrane transport of amino acids, carboxylic acids, and organic acids, growth factor binding, and metabolites associated with amino acid, carboxylic acid, and sugar metabolism. This suggests a dual role of GSC-derived sEVs in supplying neighboring GSCs with valuable metabolites and proteins responsible for their transport. Moreover, GSC-derived sEVs were enriched in saturated fatty acids, while their respective cells were high in unsaturated fatty acids, supporting that the loading of biological cargos into sEVs is a highly regulated process and that GSC-derived sEVs could be sources of saturated fatty acids for the maintenance of glioblastoma cell metabolism. Interestingly, sEVs isolated from GSCs of the proneural and mesenchymal subtypes are enriched in specific sets of proteins, metabolites, and fatty acids, suggesting a molecular collaboration between transcriptionally different glioblastoma cells. In summary, this study revealed the complexity of GSC-derived sEVs and unveiled their potential contribution to tumor heterogeneity and critical cellular processes commonly deregulated in glioblastoma. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (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
small extracellular vesicles (sEVs)
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Density cushion
Protein markers
EV: Alix/ CD9/ TSG101/ Syndecan-1/ Enolase 1
non-EV: Albumin/ Calreticulin/ Calnexin/ Argonaute-2/ GM130/ PMP70/ Prohibitin/ Tamm-Horsfall protein/ Cytochrome c1/ Lamin B1/ 60S acidic ribosomal protein P0
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
Glioblastoma stem-like cells NCH705
EV-harvesting Medium
Serum free medium
Cell viability (%)
98
Cell count
204312000 - 225840000
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 28
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
10
Wash: time (min)
70
Wash: Rotor Type
SW 40 Ti
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Density cushion
Density medium
Iodixanol
Sample volume
7
Cushion volume
4
Density of the cushion
20%
Centrifugation time
70
Centrifugation speed
100000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Fluorometric assay
Protein Yield (µg)
per million cells
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
Alix/ CD9/ TSG101/ Syndecan-1/ Enolase 1
Detected contaminants
60S acidic ribosomal protein P0 (RPLP0)
Not detected contaminants
GM130/ Lamin B1/ Cytochrome c
Proteomics database
ProteomeXchange
Detected contaminants
Albumin/ Calreticulin/ Calnexin
Not detected contaminants
Argonaute 2/ GM130/ PMP70/ Prohibitin/ Tamm-Horsfall protein/ Cytochrome c1
Characterization: Lipid analysis
Yes
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
179.7
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 6,05E+12
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV220326 4/4 Homo sapiens Glioblastoma stem-like cells NCH711d (d)(U)C
DC
Lokumcu T 2024 78%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Lokumcu T, Iskar M, Schneider M, Helm D, Klinke G, Schlicker L, Bethke F, Müller G, Richter K, Poschet G, Phillips E, Goidts V
Journal
ACS Nano
Abstract
Glioblastoma is a deadly brain tumor for which there is no cure. The presence of glioblastoma stem-l (show more...)Glioblastoma is a deadly brain tumor for which there is no cure. The presence of glioblastoma stem-like cells (GSCs) contributes to the heterogeneous nature of the disease and makes developing effective therapies challenging. Glioblastoma cells have been shown to influence their environment by releasing biological nanostructures known as extracellular vesicles (EVs). Here, we investigated the role of GSC-derived nanosized EVs (<200 nm) in glioblastoma heterogeneity, plasticity, and aggressiveness, with a particular focus on their protein, metabolite, and fatty acid content. We showed that conditioned medium and small extracellular vesicles (sEVs) derived from cells of one glioblastoma subtype induced transcriptomic and proteomic changes in cells of another subtype. We found that GSC-derived sEVs are enriched in proteins playing a role in the transmembrane transport of amino acids, carboxylic acids, and organic acids, growth factor binding, and metabolites associated with amino acid, carboxylic acid, and sugar metabolism. This suggests a dual role of GSC-derived sEVs in supplying neighboring GSCs with valuable metabolites and proteins responsible for their transport. Moreover, GSC-derived sEVs were enriched in saturated fatty acids, while their respective cells were high in unsaturated fatty acids, supporting that the loading of biological cargos into sEVs is a highly regulated process and that GSC-derived sEVs could be sources of saturated fatty acids for the maintenance of glioblastoma cell metabolism. Interestingly, sEVs isolated from GSCs of the proneural and mesenchymal subtypes are enriched in specific sets of proteins, metabolites, and fatty acids, suggesting a molecular collaboration between transcriptionally different glioblastoma cells. In summary, this study revealed the complexity of GSC-derived sEVs and unveiled their potential contribution to tumor heterogeneity and critical cellular processes commonly deregulated in glioblastoma. (hide)
EV-METRIC
78% (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
small extracellular vesicles (sEVs)
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Density cushion
Protein markers
EV: Alix/ CD9/ TSG101/ Syndecan-1/ Enolase 1
non-EV: Albumin/ Calreticulin/ Calnexin/ Argonaute-2/ GM130/ PMP70/ Tamm-Horsfall protein/ Cytochrome c1/ Lamin B1/ 60S acidic ribosomal protein P0
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
Glioblastoma stem-like cells NCH711d
EV-harvesting Medium
Serum free medium
Cell viability (%)
89 - 91
Cell count
102240000 - 116112000
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
SW 28
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
10
Wash: time (min)
70
Wash: Rotor Type
SW 40 Ti
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Density cushion
Density medium
Iodixanol
Sample volume
7
Cushion volume
4
Density of the cushion
20%
Centrifugation time
70
Centrifugation speed
100000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Fluorometric assay
Protein Yield (µg)
per million cells
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
Alix/ CD9/ TSG101/ Syndecan-1/ Enolase 1
Detected contaminants
60S acidic ribosomal protein P0 (RPLP0)
Not detected contaminants
GM130/ Lamin B1/ Cytochrome c
Proteomics database
ProteomeXchange
Detected contaminants
Albumin/ Calreticulin/ Calnexin
Not detected contaminants
Argonaute 2/ GM130/ PMP70/ Tamm-Horsfall protein/ Cytochrome c1
Characterization: Lipid analysis
Yes
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
203.5
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 2,87E+12
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV231013 2/5 Homo sapiens Blood plasma Total Exosome Isolation Robinson, Stephen 2024 75%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Stephen David Robinson, Mark Samuels, William Jones, Nicolas Stewart, Murat Eravci, Nektarios K Mazarakis, Duncan Gilbert, Giles Critchley, Georgios Giamas 
Journal
Abstract
Background Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are amongst the most promising candidates for developing bl (show more...)Background Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are amongst the most promising candidates for developing blood-based biomarkers. However, patient sample availability is a key barrier to translational research whilst most biobanks store samples of 1.5mL volume or less. To date, there is no consensus on the most suitable method of EV separation and current techniques frequently require large volumes of biofluids, complicated technology, technical expertise, or significant operating costs, which prevents their widespread adoption by less EV-focussed laboratories. Therefore, there is a need for an easy and reproducible method that separates representative EVs from clinically relevant 1mL volumes of plasma prior to subsequent biomarker identification. Methods In this study, EVs were separated from a clinically relevant 1mL volume of human plasma using four different separation techniques: size exclusion chromatography (SEC), differential ultracentrifugation, precipitation, and immunoaffinity magnetic bead capture. The EVs were characterised using several orthogonal techniques (protein quantification, nanoparticle tracking analysis, transmission electron microscopy, Western blot, single particle interferometric reflectance imaging sensing, and mass spectrometry-based proteomics) to comprehensively compare the separated samples. Results We provide examples of anticipated results highlighting that SEC-processed samples have greater protein quantification yield, greater particle yield of the expected size for EVs, and sufficient EV purity, which facilitates effective EV cargo assessment by proteomics. Moreover, we confirm significant overlap with known EV-related proteins within the Vesiclepedia database. Additionally, using single particle interferometric reflectance imaging sensing (Leprechaun®), we identify that SEC has the most representative surface tetraspanin distribution of the separated EV population compared to unprocessed plasma. Discussion Given that SEC requires minimal expertise, no complicated technology and can separate EVs within 90 min, this comparison reinforces SEC as a clinically relevant EV separation method from 1mL of plasma making it suitable for widespread implementation. (hide)
EV-METRIC
75% (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
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
Total Exosome Isolation
Protein markers
EV: TSG101/ CD9/ CD63/ CD81/ HSP70/ Syntenin
non-EV: Albumin/ GM130/ ApoB/ ApoE/ ApoA1
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Blood plasma
Separation Method
Commercial kit
Total Exosome Isolation
Other
Name other separation method
Total Exosome Isolation
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
microBCA
Protein Yield (µg)
per milliliter of starting sample
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
TSG101
Not detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD63/ CD81/ HSP70/ Syntenin
Detected contaminants
ApoA1
Not detected contaminants
Albumin/ GM130/ ApoB/ ApoE
Detected contaminants
Albumin
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD63/ CD81
Characterization: Lipid analysis
Yes
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
92
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 3.18E+12
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Other particle analysis name(3)
Single particle interferometric reflectance imaging sensing (Leprechaun)
Report type
Mean
EV231013 3/5 Homo sapiens Blood plasma qEV Robinson, Stephen 2024 75%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Stephen David Robinson, Mark Samuels, William Jones, Nicolas Stewart, Murat Eravci, Nektarios K Mazarakis, Duncan Gilbert, Giles Critchley, Georgios Giamas 
Journal
Abstract
Background Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are amongst the most promising candidates for developing bl (show more...)Background Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are amongst the most promising candidates for developing blood-based biomarkers. However, patient sample availability is a key barrier to translational research whilst most biobanks store samples of 1.5mL volume or less. To date, there is no consensus on the most suitable method of EV separation and current techniques frequently require large volumes of biofluids, complicated technology, technical expertise, or significant operating costs, which prevents their widespread adoption by less EV-focussed laboratories. Therefore, there is a need for an easy and reproducible method that separates representative EVs from clinically relevant 1mL volumes of plasma prior to subsequent biomarker identification. Methods In this study, EVs were separated from a clinically relevant 1mL volume of human plasma using four different separation techniques: size exclusion chromatography (SEC), differential ultracentrifugation, precipitation, and immunoaffinity magnetic bead capture. The EVs were characterised using several orthogonal techniques (protein quantification, nanoparticle tracking analysis, transmission electron microscopy, Western blot, single particle interferometric reflectance imaging sensing, and mass spectrometry-based proteomics) to comprehensively compare the separated samples. Results We provide examples of anticipated results highlighting that SEC-processed samples have greater protein quantification yield, greater particle yield of the expected size for EVs, and sufficient EV purity, which facilitates effective EV cargo assessment by proteomics. Moreover, we confirm significant overlap with known EV-related proteins within the Vesiclepedia database. Additionally, using single particle interferometric reflectance imaging sensing (Leprechaun®), we identify that SEC has the most representative surface tetraspanin distribution of the separated EV population compared to unprocessed plasma. Discussion Given that SEC requires minimal expertise, no complicated technology and can separate EVs within 90 min, this comparison reinforces SEC as a clinically relevant EV separation method from 1mL of plasma making it suitable for widespread implementation. (hide)
EV-METRIC
75% (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
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
qEV
Protein markers
EV: CD9/ CD63/ CD81/ HSP70/ TSG101/ Syntenin
non-EV: Albumin/ GM130/ ApoA1/ ApoE/ ApoB
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Blood plasma
Separation Method
Commercial kit
qEV
Other
Name other separation method
qEV
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
BCA
Protein Yield (µg)
per milliliter of starting sample
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD63/ CD81/ HSP70/ TSG101/ Syntenin
Detected contaminants
ApoB
Not detected contaminants
Albumin/ GM130/ ApoA1/ ApoE
Detected contaminants
Albumin
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD63/ CD81
Characterization: Lipid analysis
Yes
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
103
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 4.95E+11
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Other particle analysis name(3)
Single particle interferometric reflectance imaging sensing (Leprechaun)
Report type
Mean
EV231013 5/5 Homo sapiens Blood plasma MagCapture Exosome Isolation Kit PS Robinson, Stephen 2024 75%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Stephen David Robinson, Mark Samuels, William Jones, Nicolas Stewart, Murat Eravci, Nektarios K Mazarakis, Duncan Gilbert, Giles Critchley, Georgios Giamas 
Journal
Abstract
Background Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are amongst the most promising candidates for developing bl (show more...)Background Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are amongst the most promising candidates for developing blood-based biomarkers. However, patient sample availability is a key barrier to translational research whilst most biobanks store samples of 1.5mL volume or less. To date, there is no consensus on the most suitable method of EV separation and current techniques frequently require large volumes of biofluids, complicated technology, technical expertise, or significant operating costs, which prevents their widespread adoption by less EV-focussed laboratories. Therefore, there is a need for an easy and reproducible method that separates representative EVs from clinically relevant 1mL volumes of plasma prior to subsequent biomarker identification. Methods In this study, EVs were separated from a clinically relevant 1mL volume of human plasma using four different separation techniques: size exclusion chromatography (SEC), differential ultracentrifugation, precipitation, and immunoaffinity magnetic bead capture. The EVs were characterised using several orthogonal techniques (protein quantification, nanoparticle tracking analysis, transmission electron microscopy, Western blot, single particle interferometric reflectance imaging sensing, and mass spectrometry-based proteomics) to comprehensively compare the separated samples. Results We provide examples of anticipated results highlighting that SEC-processed samples have greater protein quantification yield, greater particle yield of the expected size for EVs, and sufficient EV purity, which facilitates effective EV cargo assessment by proteomics. Moreover, we confirm significant overlap with known EV-related proteins within the Vesiclepedia database. Additionally, using single particle interferometric reflectance imaging sensing (Leprechaun®), we identify that SEC has the most representative surface tetraspanin distribution of the separated EV population compared to unprocessed plasma. Discussion Given that SEC requires minimal expertise, no complicated technology and can separate EVs within 90 min, this comparison reinforces SEC as a clinically relevant EV separation method from 1mL of plasma making it suitable for widespread implementation. (hide)
EV-METRIC
75% (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
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
Commercial method
Protein markers
EV: CD9/ HSP70/ CD63/ CD81/ TSG101/ Syntenin
non-EV: GM130/ ApoA1/ ApoB/ ApoE/ Albumin
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Biomarker/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Blood plasma
Separation Method
Commercial kit
MagCapture Exosome Isolation Kit PS
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
microBCA
Protein Yield (µg)
per milliliter of starting sample
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ HSP70
Not detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ CD81/ TSG101/ Syntenin
Detected contaminants
Albumin
Not detected contaminants
GM130/ ApoA1/ ApoB/ ApoE
Detected contaminants
Albumin
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD63/ CD81
Characterization: Lipid analysis
Yes
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
150
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 1.92E+10
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Other particle analysis name(3)
Single particle interferometric reflectance imaging sensing (Leprechaun)
Report type
Mean
EV231008 1/27 Homo sapiens malignant ascites (d)(U)C
DC
Vyhlídalová Kotrbová A 2024 75%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Vyhlídalová Kotrbová A, Gömöryová K, Mikulová A, Plešingerová H, Sladeček S, Kravec M, Hrachovinová Š, Potěšil D, Dunsmore G, Blériot C, Bied M, Kotouček J, Bednaříková M, Hausnerová J, Minář L, Crha I, Felsinger M, Zdráhal Z, Ginhoux F, Weinberger V, Bryja V, Pospíchalová V
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
High-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tube and peritoneum (HGSC), the most common type (show more...)High-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tube and peritoneum (HGSC), the most common type of ovarian cancer, ranks among the deadliest malignancies. Many HGSC patients have excess fluid in the peritoneum called ascites. Ascites is a tumour microenvironment (TME) containing various cells, proteins and extracellular vesicles (EVs). We isolated EVs from patients' ascites by orthogonal methods and analyzed them by mass spectrometry. We identified not only a set of 'core ascitic EV-associated proteins' but also defined their subset unique to HGSC ascites. Using single-cell RNA sequencing data, we mapped the origin of HGSC-specific EVs to different types of cells present in ascites. Surprisingly, EVs did not come predominantly from tumour cells but from non-malignant cell types such as macrophages and fibroblasts. Flow cytometry of ascitic cells in combination with analysis of EV protein composition in matched samples showed that analysis of cell type-specific EV markers in HGSC has more substantial prognostic potential than analysis of ascitic cells. To conclude, we provide evidence that proteomic analysis of EVs can define the cellular composition of HGSC TME. This finding opens numerous avenues both for a better understanding of EV's role in tumour promotion/prevention and for improved HGSC diagnostics. (hide)
EV-METRIC
75% (90th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type)
 Reported
 Not reported
 Not applicable
EV-enriched proteins
Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins
non EV-enriched protein
Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein
qualitative and quantitative analysis
Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. 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
malignant ascites
Sample origin
ovarian cancer (HGSC) patient 1
Focus vesicles
extracellular vesicle
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Density cushion
Protein markers
EV: CD9/ CD81/ Flotillin-1/ Flotillin-2
non-EV: Apolipoprotein A-1/ Albumin/ Calreticulin/ GM130/ PMP70/ Argonaute-2/ Tamm-Horsfall protein
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
malignant ascites
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
No
Density cushion
Density medium
Sucrose
Sample volume
34
Cushion volume
4
Density of the cushion
30%
Centrifugation time
70
Centrifugation speed
100,000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD81/ Flotillin-1/ Flotillin-2
Detected contaminants
Apolipoprotein A-1
Proteomics database
ProteomeXchange
Detected contaminants
Albumin/ Calreticulin/ GM130/ PMP70/ Apolipoprotein A-1
Not detected contaminants
Argonaute-2/ Tamm-Horsfall protein
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
DLS
Report type
Mean±SD
Reported size (nm)
188±24
Used for determining EV concentration?
Yes
EM
EM-type
Cryo-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV231008 2/27 Homo sapiens malignant ascites (d)(U)C
UF
qEV
Vyhlídalová Kotrbová A 2024 75%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Vyhlídalová Kotrbová A, Gömöryová K, Mikulová A, Plešingerová H, Sladeček S, Kravec M, Hrachovinová Š, Potěšil D, Dunsmore G, Blériot C, Bied M, Kotouček J, Bednaříková M, Hausnerová J, Minář L, Crha I, Felsinger M, Zdráhal Z, Ginhoux F, Weinberger V, Bryja V, Pospíchalová V
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
High-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tube and peritoneum (HGSC), the most common type (show more...)High-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tube and peritoneum (HGSC), the most common type of ovarian cancer, ranks among the deadliest malignancies. Many HGSC patients have excess fluid in the peritoneum called ascites. Ascites is a tumour microenvironment (TME) containing various cells, proteins and extracellular vesicles (EVs). We isolated EVs from patients' ascites by orthogonal methods and analyzed them by mass spectrometry. We identified not only a set of 'core ascitic EV-associated proteins' but also defined their subset unique to HGSC ascites. Using single-cell RNA sequencing data, we mapped the origin of HGSC-specific EVs to different types of cells present in ascites. Surprisingly, EVs did not come predominantly from tumour cells but from non-malignant cell types such as macrophages and fibroblasts. Flow cytometry of ascitic cells in combination with analysis of EV protein composition in matched samples showed that analysis of cell type-specific EV markers in HGSC has more substantial prognostic potential than analysis of ascitic cells. To conclude, we provide evidence that proteomic analysis of EVs can define the cellular composition of HGSC TME. This finding opens numerous avenues both for a better understanding of EV's role in tumour promotion/prevention and for improved HGSC diagnostics. (hide)
EV-METRIC
75% (90th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type)
 Reported
 Not reported
 Not applicable
EV-enriched proteins
Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins
non EV-enriched protein
Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein
qualitative and quantitative analysis
Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. 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
malignant ascites
Sample origin
ovarian cancer (HGSC) patient 1
Focus vesicles
extracellular vesicle
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Ultrafiltration
qEV
Protein markers
EV: CD9/ CD81/ Flotillin-1/ Flotillin-2
non-EV: Apolipoprotein A-1/ Albumin/ Calreticulin/ GM130/ PMP70/ Prohibitin/ Argonaute-2/ Tamm-Horsfall protein
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
malignant ascites
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Pelleting performed
No
Ultra filtration
Cut-off size (kDa)
10
Membrane type
Polyethersulfone (PES)
Commercial kit
qEV
Other
Name other separation method
qEV
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD81/ Flotillin-1/ Flotillin-2
Detected contaminants
Apolipoprotein A-1
Proteomics database
ProteomeXchange
Detected contaminants
Albumin/ Calreticulin/ GM130/ PMP70/ Prohibitin
Not detected contaminants
Argonaute-2/ Tamm-Horsfall protein
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
DLS
Report type
Mean±SD
Reported size (nm)
689±205
Used for determining EV concentration?
Yes
EM
EM-type
Cryo-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV231008 3/27 Homo sapiens malignant ascites (d)(U)C
DC
Vyhlídalová Kotrbová A 2024 75%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Vyhlídalová Kotrbová A, Gömöryová K, Mikulová A, Plešingerová H, Sladeček S, Kravec M, Hrachovinová Š, Potěšil D, Dunsmore G, Blériot C, Bied M, Kotouček J, Bednaříková M, Hausnerová J, Minář L, Crha I, Felsinger M, Zdráhal Z, Ginhoux F, Weinberger V, Bryja V, Pospíchalová V
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
High-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tube and peritoneum (HGSC), the most common type (show more...)High-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tube and peritoneum (HGSC), the most common type of ovarian cancer, ranks among the deadliest malignancies. Many HGSC patients have excess fluid in the peritoneum called ascites. Ascites is a tumour microenvironment (TME) containing various cells, proteins and extracellular vesicles (EVs). We isolated EVs from patients' ascites by orthogonal methods and analyzed them by mass spectrometry. We identified not only a set of 'core ascitic EV-associated proteins' but also defined their subset unique to HGSC ascites. Using single-cell RNA sequencing data, we mapped the origin of HGSC-specific EVs to different types of cells present in ascites. Surprisingly, EVs did not come predominantly from tumour cells but from non-malignant cell types such as macrophages and fibroblasts. Flow cytometry of ascitic cells in combination with analysis of EV protein composition in matched samples showed that analysis of cell type-specific EV markers in HGSC has more substantial prognostic potential than analysis of ascitic cells. To conclude, we provide evidence that proteomic analysis of EVs can define the cellular composition of HGSC TME. This finding opens numerous avenues both for a better understanding of EV's role in tumour promotion/prevention and for improved HGSC diagnostics. (hide)
EV-METRIC
75% (90th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type)
 Reported
 Not reported
 Not applicable
EV-enriched proteins
Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins
non EV-enriched protein
Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein
qualitative and quantitative analysis
Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. 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
malignant ascites
Sample origin
ovarian cancer (HGSC) patient 2
Focus vesicles
extracellular vesicle
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Density cushion
Protein markers
EV: CD9/ CD81/ Flotillin-1/ Flotillin-2
non-EV: Apolipoprotein A-1/ Albumin/ Argonaute-2/ Calreticulin/ GM130/ PMP70/ Prohibitin/ Tamm-Horsfall protein
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
malignant ascites
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
No
Density cushion
Density medium
Sucrose
Sample volume
34
Cushion volume
4
Density of the cushion
30%
Centrifugation time
70
Centrifugation speed
100,000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD81/ Flotillin-1/ Flotillin-2
Detected contaminants
Apolipoprotein A-1
Proteomics database
ProteomeXchange
Detected contaminants
Albumin/ Argonaute-2/ Calreticulin/ GM130/ PMP70/ Prohibitin/ Apolipoprotein A-1
Not detected contaminants
Tamm-Horsfall protein
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
DLS
Report type
Mean±SD
Reported size (nm)
200±3
Used for determining EV concentration?
Yes
EM
EM-type
Cryo-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV231008 4/27 Homo sapiens malignant ascites (d)(U)C
UF
qEV
Vyhlídalová Kotrbová A 2024 75%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Vyhlídalová Kotrbová A, Gömöryová K, Mikulová A, Plešingerová H, Sladeček S, Kravec M, Hrachovinová Š, Potěšil D, Dunsmore G, Blériot C, Bied M, Kotouček J, Bednaříková M, Hausnerová J, Minář L, Crha I, Felsinger M, Zdráhal Z, Ginhoux F, Weinberger V, Bryja V, Pospíchalová V
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
High-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tube and peritoneum (HGSC), the most common type (show more...)High-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tube and peritoneum (HGSC), the most common type of ovarian cancer, ranks among the deadliest malignancies. Many HGSC patients have excess fluid in the peritoneum called ascites. Ascites is a tumour microenvironment (TME) containing various cells, proteins and extracellular vesicles (EVs). We isolated EVs from patients' ascites by orthogonal methods and analyzed them by mass spectrometry. We identified not only a set of 'core ascitic EV-associated proteins' but also defined their subset unique to HGSC ascites. Using single-cell RNA sequencing data, we mapped the origin of HGSC-specific EVs to different types of cells present in ascites. Surprisingly, EVs did not come predominantly from tumour cells but from non-malignant cell types such as macrophages and fibroblasts. Flow cytometry of ascitic cells in combination with analysis of EV protein composition in matched samples showed that analysis of cell type-specific EV markers in HGSC has more substantial prognostic potential than analysis of ascitic cells. To conclude, we provide evidence that proteomic analysis of EVs can define the cellular composition of HGSC TME. This finding opens numerous avenues both for a better understanding of EV's role in tumour promotion/prevention and for improved HGSC diagnostics. (hide)
EV-METRIC
75% (90th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type)
 Reported
 Not reported
 Not applicable
EV-enriched proteins
Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins
non EV-enriched protein
Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein
qualitative and quantitative analysis
Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. 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
malignant ascites
Sample origin
ovarian cancer (HGSC) patient 2
Focus vesicles
extracellular vesicle
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Ultrafiltration
qEV
Protein markers
EV: CD9/ CD81/ Flotillin-1/ Flotillin-2
non-EV: Apolipoprotein A-1/ Albumin/ Calreticulin/ PMP70/ Prohibitin/ Argonaute-2/ GM130/ Tamm-Horsfall protein
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
malignant ascites
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Pelleting performed
No
Ultra filtration
Cut-off size (kDa)
10
Membrane type
Polyethersulfone (PES)
Commercial kit
qEV
Other
Name other separation method
qEV
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD9/ CD81/ Flotillin-1/ Flotillin-2
Detected contaminants
Apolipoprotein A-1
Proteomics database
ProteomeXchange
Detected contaminants
Albumin/ Calreticulin/ PMP70/ Prohibitin/ Apolipoprotein A-1
Not detected contaminants
Argonaute-2/ GM130/ Tamm-Horsfall protein
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
DLS
Report type
Mean±SD
Reported size (nm)
1009±417
Used for determining EV concentration?
Yes
EM
EM-type
Cryo-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV240137 2/4 Mus musculus Blood plasma (d)(U)C
Filtration
Arteaga-Blanco, Luis A. 2024 67%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Luis A. Arteaga-Blanco, Andrew E. Evans, Dan A. Dixon
Journal
Cells
Abstract
NA (show more...)NA (hide)
EV-METRIC
67% (93rd percentile of all experiments on the same sample type)
 Reported
 Not reported
 Not applicable
EV-enriched proteins
Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins
non EV-enriched protein
Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein
qualitative and quantitative analysis
Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Blood plasma
Sample origin
Control condition
Focus vesicles
small extracellular vesicle
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Filtration
Protein markers
EV: CD63/ CD81/ actin-beta
non-EV: None
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function/Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Mus musculus
Sample Type
Blood plasma
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
S55-S
Pelleting: speed (g)
150000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
2
Wash: time (min)
70
Wash: Rotor Type
S55-S
Wash: speed (g)
150000
Filtration steps
0.8 µm/ 0.2 or 0.22 µm
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Fluorometric assay
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ CD81/ actin-beta
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
108
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 4.10E+08
EM
EM-type
Scanning-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
120
EV240137 4/4 Mus musculus Blood plasma (d)(U)C
Filtration
Arteaga-Blanco, Luis A. 2024 67%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Luis A. Arteaga-Blanco, Andrew E. Evans, Dan A. Dixon
Journal
Cells
Abstract
NA (show more...)NA (hide)
EV-METRIC
67% (93rd percentile of all experiments on the same sample type)
 Reported
 Not reported
 Not applicable
EV-enriched proteins
Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins
non EV-enriched protein
Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein
qualitative and quantitative analysis
Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Blood plasma
Sample origin
APCMin/+ CRC mice model
Focus vesicles
small extracellular vesicle
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Filtration
Protein markers
EV: CD63/ CD81/ actin-beta
non-EV: None
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Function/Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Mus musculus
Sample Type
Blood plasma
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
S55-S
Pelleting: speed (g)
150000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
2
Wash: time (min)
70
Wash: Rotor Type
S55-S
Wash: speed (g)
150000
Filtration steps
0.8 µm/ 0.2 or 0.22 µm
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Fluorometric assay
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ CD81/ actin-beta
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
120
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 1.36E+09
EM
EM-type
Scanning-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
132
EV231008 5/27 Homo sapiens malignant ascites (d)(U)C
DC
Vyhlídalová Kotrbová A 2024 67%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Vyhlídalová Kotrbová A, Gömöryová K, Mikulová A, Plešingerová H, Sladeček S, Kravec M, Hrachovinová Š, Potěšil D, Dunsmore G, Blériot C, Bied M, Kotouček J, Bednaříková M, Hausnerová J, Minář L, Crha I, Felsinger M, Zdráhal Z, Ginhoux F, Weinberger V, Bryja V, Pospíchalová V
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
High-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tube and peritoneum (HGSC), the most common type (show more...)High-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tube and peritoneum (HGSC), the most common type of ovarian cancer, ranks among the deadliest malignancies. Many HGSC patients have excess fluid in the peritoneum called ascites. Ascites is a tumour microenvironment (TME) containing various cells, proteins and extracellular vesicles (EVs). We isolated EVs from patients' ascites by orthogonal methods and analyzed them by mass spectrometry. We identified not only a set of 'core ascitic EV-associated proteins' but also defined their subset unique to HGSC ascites. Using single-cell RNA sequencing data, we mapped the origin of HGSC-specific EVs to different types of cells present in ascites. Surprisingly, EVs did not come predominantly from tumour cells but from non-malignant cell types such as macrophages and fibroblasts. Flow cytometry of ascitic cells in combination with analysis of EV protein composition in matched samples showed that analysis of cell type-specific EV markers in HGSC has more substantial prognostic potential than analysis of ascitic cells. To conclude, we provide evidence that proteomic analysis of EVs can define the cellular composition of HGSC TME. This finding opens numerous avenues both for a better understanding of EV's role in tumour promotion/prevention and for improved HGSC diagnostics. (hide)
EV-METRIC
67% (72nd 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
malignant ascites
Sample origin
ovarian cancer (HGSC) patient 3
Focus vesicles
extracellular vesicle
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Density cushion
Protein markers
EV: None
non-EV: Albumin/ Argonaute-2/ Calreticulin/ GM130/ PMP70/ Prohibitin/ Apolipoprotein A-1/ Tamm-Horsfall protein
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
malignant ascites
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
No
Density cushion
Density medium
Sucrose
Sample volume
34
Cushion volume
4
Density of the cushion
30%
Centrifugation time
70
Centrifugation speed
100,000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
Proteomics database
ProteomeXchange
Detected contaminants
Albumin/ Argonaute-2/ Calreticulin/ GM130/ PMP70/ Prohibitin/ Apolipoprotein A-1
Not detected contaminants
Tamm-Horsfall protein
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
DLS
Report type
Mean±SD
Reported size (nm)
403±47
Used for determining EV concentration?
Yes
EM
EM-type
Cryo-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV231008 6/27 Homo sapiens malignant ascites (d)(U)C
UF
qEV
Vyhlídalová Kotrbová A 2024 67%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Vyhlídalová Kotrbová A, Gömöryová K, Mikulová A, Plešingerová H, Sladeček S, Kravec M, Hrachovinová Š, Potěšil D, Dunsmore G, Blériot C, Bied M, Kotouček J, Bednaříková M, Hausnerová J, Minář L, Crha I, Felsinger M, Zdráhal Z, Ginhoux F, Weinberger V, Bryja V, Pospíchalová V
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
High-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tube and peritoneum (HGSC), the most common type (show more...)High-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tube and peritoneum (HGSC), the most common type of ovarian cancer, ranks among the deadliest malignancies. Many HGSC patients have excess fluid in the peritoneum called ascites. Ascites is a tumour microenvironment (TME) containing various cells, proteins and extracellular vesicles (EVs). We isolated EVs from patients' ascites by orthogonal methods and analyzed them by mass spectrometry. We identified not only a set of 'core ascitic EV-associated proteins' but also defined their subset unique to HGSC ascites. Using single-cell RNA sequencing data, we mapped the origin of HGSC-specific EVs to different types of cells present in ascites. Surprisingly, EVs did not come predominantly from tumour cells but from non-malignant cell types such as macrophages and fibroblasts. Flow cytometry of ascitic cells in combination with analysis of EV protein composition in matched samples showed that analysis of cell type-specific EV markers in HGSC has more substantial prognostic potential than analysis of ascitic cells. To conclude, we provide evidence that proteomic analysis of EVs can define the cellular composition of HGSC TME. This finding opens numerous avenues both for a better understanding of EV's role in tumour promotion/prevention and for improved HGSC diagnostics. (hide)
EV-METRIC
67% (72nd 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
malignant ascites
Sample origin
ovarian cancer (HGSC) patient 3
Focus vesicles
extracellular vesicle
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Ultrafiltration
qEV
Protein markers
EV: None
non-EV: Albumin/ Calreticulin/ PMP70/ Prohibitin/ Apolipoprotein A-1/ Argonaute-2/ GM130/ Tamm-Horsfall protein
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
malignant ascites
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Pelleting performed
No
Ultra filtration
Cut-off size (kDa)
10
Membrane type
Polyethersulfone (PES)
Commercial kit
qEV
Other
Name other separation method
qEV
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
Proteomics database
ProteomeXchange
Detected contaminants
Albumin/ Calreticulin/ PMP70/ Prohibitin/ Apolipoprotein A-1
Not detected contaminants
Argonaute-2/ GM130/ Tamm-Horsfall protein
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
DLS
Report type
Mean±SD
Reported size (nm)
730±158
Used for determining EV concentration?
Yes
EM
EM-type
Cryo-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV231008 7/27 Homo sapiens malignant ascites (d)(U)C
DC
Vyhlídalová Kotrbová A 2024 67%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Vyhlídalová Kotrbová A, Gömöryová K, Mikulová A, Plešingerová H, Sladeček S, Kravec M, Hrachovinová Š, Potěšil D, Dunsmore G, Blériot C, Bied M, Kotouček J, Bednaříková M, Hausnerová J, Minář L, Crha I, Felsinger M, Zdráhal Z, Ginhoux F, Weinberger V, Bryja V, Pospíchalová V
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
High-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tube and peritoneum (HGSC), the most common type (show more...)High-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tube and peritoneum (HGSC), the most common type of ovarian cancer, ranks among the deadliest malignancies. Many HGSC patients have excess fluid in the peritoneum called ascites. Ascites is a tumour microenvironment (TME) containing various cells, proteins and extracellular vesicles (EVs). We isolated EVs from patients' ascites by orthogonal methods and analyzed them by mass spectrometry. We identified not only a set of 'core ascitic EV-associated proteins' but also defined their subset unique to HGSC ascites. Using single-cell RNA sequencing data, we mapped the origin of HGSC-specific EVs to different types of cells present in ascites. Surprisingly, EVs did not come predominantly from tumour cells but from non-malignant cell types such as macrophages and fibroblasts. Flow cytometry of ascitic cells in combination with analysis of EV protein composition in matched samples showed that analysis of cell type-specific EV markers in HGSC has more substantial prognostic potential than analysis of ascitic cells. To conclude, we provide evidence that proteomic analysis of EVs can define the cellular composition of HGSC TME. This finding opens numerous avenues both for a better understanding of EV's role in tumour promotion/prevention and for improved HGSC diagnostics. (hide)
EV-METRIC
67% (72nd 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
malignant ascites
Sample origin
ovarian cancer (HGSC) patient 4
Focus vesicles
extracellular vesicle
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Density cushion
Protein markers
EV: None
non-EV: Albumin/ Calreticulin/ GM130/ PMP70/ Prohibitin/ Apolipoprotein A-1/ Argonaute-2/ Tamm-Horsfall protein
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
malignant ascites
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Pelleting performed
No
Density cushion
Density medium
Sucrose
Sample volume
34
Cushion volume
4
Density of the cushion
30%
Centrifugation time
70
Centrifugation speed
100,000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
Proteomics database
ProteomeXchange
Detected contaminants
Albumin/ Calreticulin/ GM130/ PMP70/ Prohibitin/ Apolipoprotein A-1
Not detected contaminants
Argonaute-2/ Tamm-Horsfall protein
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
DLS
Report type
Mean±SD
Reported size (nm)
222±22
Used for determining EV concentration?
Yes
EM
EM-type
Cryo-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV231008 8/27 Homo sapiens malignant ascites (d)(U)C
UF
qEV
Vyhlídalová Kotrbová A 2024 67%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Vyhlídalová Kotrbová A, Gömöryová K, Mikulová A, Plešingerová H, Sladeček S, Kravec M, Hrachovinová Š, Potěšil D, Dunsmore G, Blériot C, Bied M, Kotouček J, Bednaříková M, Hausnerová J, Minář L, Crha I, Felsinger M, Zdráhal Z, Ginhoux F, Weinberger V, Bryja V, Pospíchalová V
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
High-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tube and peritoneum (HGSC), the most common type (show more...)High-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tube and peritoneum (HGSC), the most common type of ovarian cancer, ranks among the deadliest malignancies. Many HGSC patients have excess fluid in the peritoneum called ascites. Ascites is a tumour microenvironment (TME) containing various cells, proteins and extracellular vesicles (EVs). We isolated EVs from patients' ascites by orthogonal methods and analyzed them by mass spectrometry. We identified not only a set of 'core ascitic EV-associated proteins' but also defined their subset unique to HGSC ascites. Using single-cell RNA sequencing data, we mapped the origin of HGSC-specific EVs to different types of cells present in ascites. Surprisingly, EVs did not come predominantly from tumour cells but from non-malignant cell types such as macrophages and fibroblasts. Flow cytometry of ascitic cells in combination with analysis of EV protein composition in matched samples showed that analysis of cell type-specific EV markers in HGSC has more substantial prognostic potential than analysis of ascitic cells. To conclude, we provide evidence that proteomic analysis of EVs can define the cellular composition of HGSC TME. This finding opens numerous avenues both for a better understanding of EV's role in tumour promotion/prevention and for improved HGSC diagnostics. (hide)
EV-METRIC
67% (72nd 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
malignant ascites
Sample origin
ovarian cancer (HGSC) patient 4
Focus vesicles
extracellular vesicle
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Ultrafiltration
qEV
Protein markers
EV: None
non-EV: Albumin/ Calreticulin/ GM130/ PMP70/ Prohibitin/ Apolipoprotein A-1/ Argonaute-2/ Tamm-Horsfall protein
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)/Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
malignant ascites
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 800 g and 10,000 g
Pelleting performed
No
Ultra filtration
Cut-off size (kDa)
10
Membrane type
Polyethersulfone (PES)
Commercial kit
qEV
Other
Name other separation method
qEV
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Not determined
Proteomics database
ProteomeXchange
Detected contaminants
Albumin/ Calreticulin/ GM130/ PMP70/ Prohibitin/ Apolipoprotein A-1
Not detected contaminants
Argonaute-2/ Tamm-Horsfall protein
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
DLS
Report type
Mean±SD
Reported size (nm)
509±115
Used for determining EV concentration?
Yes
EM
EM-type
Cryo-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
EV231007 1/1 Homo sapiens Liver tissue conditioned media STEMCELL SEC columns
UF
Newman LA 2024 67%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Newman LA, Useckaite Z, Wu T, Sorich MJ, Rowland A
Journal
Br J Clin Pharmacol
Abstract
Drug exposure and response is determined by pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) profiles. (show more...)Drug exposure and response is determined by pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) profiles. Interindividual differences in abundance of drug metabolizing enzymes (DMEs) and drug target proteins underpin PK and PD variability and impact treatment efficacy and tolerability. Extracellular vesicles (EVs) carry protein cargo inherited from originating cells and may be useful for defining differences in key proteins related to hepatic drug metabolism and the treatment of metabolic-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD). We sought to quantify these proteins in liver-derived EVs and establish the profile relative to paired tissue. (hide)
EV-METRIC
67% (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
Liver tissue conditioned media
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
STEMCELL SEC columns
Ultrafiltration
Protein markers
EV: None
non-EV: Albumin
Proteomics
yes
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Liver tissue conditioned media
Separation Method
Ultra filtration
Cut-off size (kDa)
30kDa
Membrane type
Regenerated cellulose
Commercial kit
STEMCELL SEC columns
Other
Name other separation method
STEMCELL SEC columns
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
microBCA
Protein Yield (µg)
per g of starting sample
Proteomics database
No
Detected contaminants
Albumin
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
Report type
Mean
Reported size (nm)
83
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per mg of starting sample: 6.65E+09
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
85
EV230995 1/6 Homo sapiens MML-1 (d)(U)C Urzì O 2024 67%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Urzì O, Bergqvist M, Lässer C, Moschetti M, Johansson J, D Arrigo D, Olofsson Bagge R, Crescitelli R
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
The release of extracellular vesicles (EVs) in cell cultures as well as their molecular cargo can be (show more...)The release of extracellular vesicles (EVs) in cell cultures as well as their molecular cargo can be influenced by cell culture conditions such as the presence of foetal bovine serum (FBS). Although several studies have evaluated the effect of removing FBS-derived EVs by ultracentrifugation (UC), less is known about the influence of FBS heat inactivation (HI) on the cell-derived EVs. To assess this, three protocols based on different combinations of EV depletion by UC and HI were evaluated, including FBS ultracentrifuged but not heat inactivated (no-HI FBS), FBS heat inactivated before EV depletion (HI-before EV-depl FBS), and FBS heat inactivated after EV depletion (HI-after EV-depl FBS). We isolated large (L-EVs) and small EVs (S-EVs) from FBS treated in the three different ways, and we found that the S-EV pellet from HI-after EV-depl FBS was larger than the S-EV pellet from no-HI FBS and HI-before EV-depl FBS. Transmission electron microscopy, protein quantification, and particle number evaluation showed that HI-after EV-depl significantly increased the protein amount of S-EVs but had no significant effect on L-EVs. Consequently, the protein quantity of S-EVs isolated from three cell lines cultured in media supplemented with HI-after EV-depl FBS was significantly increased. Quantitative mass spectrometry analysis of FBS-derived S-EVs showed that the EV protein content was different when FBS was HI after EV depletion compared to EVs isolated from no-HI FBS and HI-before EV-depl FBS. Moreover, we show that several quantified proteins could be ascribed to human origin, thus demonstrating that FBS bovine proteins can mistakenly be attributed to human cell-derived EVs. We conclude that HI of FBS performed after EV depletion results in changes in the proteome, with molecules that co-isolate with EVs and can contaminate EVs when used in subsequent cell cultures. Our recommendation is, therefore, to always perform HI of FBS prior to EV depletion. (hide)
EV-METRIC
67% (94th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type)
 Reported
 Not reported
 Not applicable
EV-enriched proteins
Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins
non EV-enriched protein
Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein
qualitative and quantitative analysis
Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Cell culture supernatant
Sample origin
Control condition
Focus vesicles
extracellular vesicle
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Protein markers
EV: CD63/ CD81/ Flotillin-1
non-EV: Calnexin
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
MML-1
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
>=18h at >= 100,000g
Cell viability (%)
94
Cell count
50000
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 45 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
16500
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Fluorometric assay
Protein Yield (µg)
per milliliter of starting sample
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
CD63/ CD81/ Flotillin-1
Detected contaminants
Calnexin
Characterization: Lipid analysis
No
Characterization: Particle analysis
NTA
EV concentration
Yes
Particle yield
particles per milliliter of starting sample: 761800000
EM
EM-type
Transmission-EM
Image type
Close-up
EV230995 2/6 Homo sapiens UM22Bap1+/+ (d)(U)C Urzì O 2024 67%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Urzì O, Bergqvist M, Lässer C, Moschetti M, Johansson J, D Arrigo D, Olofsson Bagge R, Crescitelli R
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
The release of extracellular vesicles (EVs) in cell cultures as well as their molecular cargo can be (show more...)The release of extracellular vesicles (EVs) in cell cultures as well as their molecular cargo can be influenced by cell culture conditions such as the presence of foetal bovine serum (FBS). Although several studies have evaluated the effect of removing FBS-derived EVs by ultracentrifugation (UC), less is known about the influence of FBS heat inactivation (HI) on the cell-derived EVs. To assess this, three protocols based on different combinations of EV depletion by UC and HI were evaluated, including FBS ultracentrifuged but not heat inactivated (no-HI FBS), FBS heat inactivated before EV depletion (HI-before EV-depl FBS), and FBS heat inactivated after EV depletion (HI-after EV-depl FBS). We isolated large (L-EVs) and small EVs (S-EVs) from FBS treated in the three different ways, and we found that the S-EV pellet from HI-after EV-depl FBS was larger than the S-EV pellet from no-HI FBS and HI-before EV-depl FBS. Transmission electron microscopy, protein quantification, and particle number evaluation showed that HI-after EV-depl significantly increased the protein amount of S-EVs but had no significant effect on L-EVs. Consequently, the protein quantity of S-EVs isolated from three cell lines cultured in media supplemented with HI-after EV-depl FBS was significantly increased. Quantitative mass spectrometry analysis of FBS-derived S-EVs showed that the EV protein content was different when FBS was HI after EV depletion compared to EVs isolated from no-HI FBS and HI-before EV-depl FBS. Moreover, we show that several quantified proteins could be ascribed to human origin, thus demonstrating that FBS bovine proteins can mistakenly be attributed to human cell-derived EVs. We conclude that HI of FBS performed after EV depletion results in changes in the proteome, with molecules that co-isolate with EVs and can contaminate EVs when used in subsequent cell cultures. Our recommendation is, therefore, to always perform HI of FBS prior to EV depletion. (hide)
EV-METRIC
67% (94th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type)
 Reported
 Not reported
 Not applicable
EV-enriched proteins
Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins
non EV-enriched protein
Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein
qualitative and quantitative analysis
Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected.
electron microscopy images
Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image
density gradient
Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs
EV density
Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density
ultracentrifugation specifics
Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps
antibody specifics
Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution
lysate preparation
Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition
Study data
Sample type
Cell culture supernatant
Sample origin
Control condition
Focus vesicles
extracellular vesicle
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
Protein markers
EV: CD63/ CD81/ Flotillin-1
non-EV: Calnexin/ bovine HBA1c/ bovine CPN1
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Technical analysis comparing/optimizing EV-related methods
Sample
Species
Homo sapiens
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
EV-producing cells
UM22Bap1+/+
EV-harvesting Medium
EV-depleted medium
Preparation of EDS
>=18h at >= 100,000g
Cell viability (%)
94
Cell count
50000
Separation Method
(Differential) (ultra)centrifugation
dUC: centrifugation steps
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Pelleting performed
Yes
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 45 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
16500
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Fluorometric assay
Protein Yield (µg)
per milliliter of starting sample