Evidence for the Need to Evaluate More Than One Source of Extracellular Vesicles, Rather Than Single or Pooled Samples Only, When Comparing Extracellular Vesicles Separation Methods

To study and exploit extracellular vesicles (EVs) for clinical benefit as biomarkers, therapeutics, or drug delivery vehicles in diseases such as cancer, typically we need to separate them from the biofluid into which they have been released by their cells of origin. For cultured cells, this fluid i...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Sarai Martinez-Pacheco, Lorraine O’Driscoll
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2021-08-01
Series:Cancers
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6694/13/16/4021
id doaj-3caff00470d34f5f9018baa5d5b4a583
record_format Article
spelling doaj-3caff00470d34f5f9018baa5d5b4a5832021-08-26T13:35:32ZengMDPI AGCancers2072-66942021-08-01134021402110.3390/cancers13164021Evidence for the Need to Evaluate More Than One Source of Extracellular Vesicles, Rather Than Single or Pooled Samples Only, When Comparing Extracellular Vesicles Separation MethodsSarai Martinez-Pacheco0Lorraine O’Driscoll1School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Panoz Institute, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, IrelandSchool of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Panoz Institute, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, IrelandTo study and exploit extracellular vesicles (EVs) for clinical benefit as biomarkers, therapeutics, or drug delivery vehicles in diseases such as cancer, typically we need to separate them from the biofluid into which they have been released by their cells of origin. For cultured cells, this fluid is conditioned medium (CM). Previous studies comparing EV separation approaches have typically focused on CM from one cell line or pooled samples of other biofluids. We hypothesize that this is inadequate and that extrapolating from a single source of EVs may not be informative. Thus, in our study of methods not previous compared (i.e., the original differential ultracentrifugation (dUC) method and a PEG followed by ultracentrifugation (PEG + UC) method), we analyzed CM from three different HER2-positive breast cancer cell lines (SKBR3, EFM192A, HCC1954) that grow in the same culture medium type. CM from each was collected and equally divided between both protocols. The resulting isolates were compared on seven characteristics/parameters including particle size, concentration, structure/morphology, protein content, purity, detection of five EV markers, and presence of HER2. Both dUC and PEG + UC generated reproducible data for any given breast cancer cell lines’ CM. However, the seven characteristics of the EV isolates were cell line- and method-dependent. This suggests the need to include more than one EV source, rather than a single or pooled sample, when selecting an EV separation method to be advanced for either research or clinical purposes.https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6694/13/16/4021extracellular vesiclesseparationenrichmentcomparison of methodologiescharacterization
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Sarai Martinez-Pacheco
Lorraine O’Driscoll
spellingShingle Sarai Martinez-Pacheco
Lorraine O’Driscoll
Evidence for the Need to Evaluate More Than One Source of Extracellular Vesicles, Rather Than Single or Pooled Samples Only, When Comparing Extracellular Vesicles Separation Methods
Cancers
extracellular vesicles
separation
enrichment
comparison of methodologies
characterization
author_facet Sarai Martinez-Pacheco
Lorraine O’Driscoll
author_sort Sarai Martinez-Pacheco
title Evidence for the Need to Evaluate More Than One Source of Extracellular Vesicles, Rather Than Single or Pooled Samples Only, When Comparing Extracellular Vesicles Separation Methods
title_short Evidence for the Need to Evaluate More Than One Source of Extracellular Vesicles, Rather Than Single or Pooled Samples Only, When Comparing Extracellular Vesicles Separation Methods
title_full Evidence for the Need to Evaluate More Than One Source of Extracellular Vesicles, Rather Than Single or Pooled Samples Only, When Comparing Extracellular Vesicles Separation Methods
title_fullStr Evidence for the Need to Evaluate More Than One Source of Extracellular Vesicles, Rather Than Single or Pooled Samples Only, When Comparing Extracellular Vesicles Separation Methods
title_full_unstemmed Evidence for the Need to Evaluate More Than One Source of Extracellular Vesicles, Rather Than Single or Pooled Samples Only, When Comparing Extracellular Vesicles Separation Methods
title_sort evidence for the need to evaluate more than one source of extracellular vesicles, rather than single or pooled samples only, when comparing extracellular vesicles separation methods
publisher MDPI AG
series Cancers
issn 2072-6694
publishDate 2021-08-01
description To study and exploit extracellular vesicles (EVs) for clinical benefit as biomarkers, therapeutics, or drug delivery vehicles in diseases such as cancer, typically we need to separate them from the biofluid into which they have been released by their cells of origin. For cultured cells, this fluid is conditioned medium (CM). Previous studies comparing EV separation approaches have typically focused on CM from one cell line or pooled samples of other biofluids. We hypothesize that this is inadequate and that extrapolating from a single source of EVs may not be informative. Thus, in our study of methods not previous compared (i.e., the original differential ultracentrifugation (dUC) method and a PEG followed by ultracentrifugation (PEG + UC) method), we analyzed CM from three different HER2-positive breast cancer cell lines (SKBR3, EFM192A, HCC1954) that grow in the same culture medium type. CM from each was collected and equally divided between both protocols. The resulting isolates were compared on seven characteristics/parameters including particle size, concentration, structure/morphology, protein content, purity, detection of five EV markers, and presence of HER2. Both dUC and PEG + UC generated reproducible data for any given breast cancer cell lines’ CM. However, the seven characteristics of the EV isolates were cell line- and method-dependent. This suggests the need to include more than one EV source, rather than a single or pooled sample, when selecting an EV separation method to be advanced for either research or clinical purposes.
topic extracellular vesicles
separation
enrichment
comparison of methodologies
characterization
url https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6694/13/16/4021
work_keys_str_mv AT saraimartinezpacheco evidencefortheneedtoevaluatemorethanonesourceofextracellularvesiclesratherthansingleorpooledsamplesonlywhencomparingextracellularvesiclesseparationmethods
AT lorraineodriscoll evidencefortheneedtoevaluatemorethanonesourceofextracellularvesiclesratherthansingleorpooledsamplesonlywhencomparingextracellularvesiclesseparationmethods
_version_ 1721194458815397888