Systematic Evaluation of Isolation Techniques and Freeze-Thaw Effects on Plasma Extracellular Vesicle Heterogeneity and Subpopulation Profiling

Xueqi Li, Xiangyu Li, Lingjun Tong, Liqiao Hu, Yanfen Hong, Ruoyu Zhou, Zonghong Li, Ming Dong, Junjie Hou, Tao Xu, Wen Zhong
{"title":"Systematic Evaluation of Isolation Techniques and Freeze-Thaw Effects on Plasma Extracellular Vesicle Heterogeneity and Subpopulation Profiling","authors":"Xueqi Li,&nbsp;Xiangyu Li,&nbsp;Lingjun Tong,&nbsp;Liqiao Hu,&nbsp;Yanfen Hong,&nbsp;Ruoyu Zhou,&nbsp;Zonghong Li,&nbsp;Ming Dong,&nbsp;Junjie Hou,&nbsp;Tao Xu,&nbsp;Wen Zhong","doi":"10.1002/jex2.70058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are increasingly recognized as promising disease biomarkers and therapeutic carriers. However, standardizing blood-derived EV isolation remains challenging due to the heterogeneity of EV populations and variability among isolation techniques. In this study, we systematically evaluated three distinct EV isolation methods, including asymmetrical flow field-flow fractionation (AF4), size-exclusion chromatography (SEC) and automated centrifugal microfluidic disc system combined with functionalized membranes (Exo-CMDS), to compare their efficiency in isolating EVs from both freshly frozen and freeze-thawed plasma samples. We utilized an integrative approach combining Proximity-dependent Barcoding Assay (PBA) for single-EV surface protein profiling, Liquid Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) for bulk proteomic analysis, along with transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA) to assess EV yield, morphology, surface protein expression and subpopulation diversity. Our results revealed significant differences in three EV isolation methods. AF4 is particularly enriched for EV subpopulations expressing high levels of classical tetraspanins (e.g., CD81, CD9 and CD151), and single-pass membrane proteins (e.g., ITGA4 and ITAGB1). Exo-CMDS demonstrated the highest reproducibility across samples, isolating specific EV subpopulations enriched in markers like CD5. SEC provided the highest yield but co-isolated significant amounts of non-vesicular particles, including lipoproteins. The findings contribute valuable insights toward standardized and reliable EV isolation practices for research and clinical applications.</p>","PeriodicalId":73747,"journal":{"name":"Journal of extracellular biology","volume":"4 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jex2.70058","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of extracellular biology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jex2.70058","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are increasingly recognized as promising disease biomarkers and therapeutic carriers. However, standardizing blood-derived EV isolation remains challenging due to the heterogeneity of EV populations and variability among isolation techniques. In this study, we systematically evaluated three distinct EV isolation methods, including asymmetrical flow field-flow fractionation (AF4), size-exclusion chromatography (SEC) and automated centrifugal microfluidic disc system combined with functionalized membranes (Exo-CMDS), to compare their efficiency in isolating EVs from both freshly frozen and freeze-thawed plasma samples. We utilized an integrative approach combining Proximity-dependent Barcoding Assay (PBA) for single-EV surface protein profiling, Liquid Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) for bulk proteomic analysis, along with transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA) to assess EV yield, morphology, surface protein expression and subpopulation diversity. Our results revealed significant differences in three EV isolation methods. AF4 is particularly enriched for EV subpopulations expressing high levels of classical tetraspanins (e.g., CD81, CD9 and CD151), and single-pass membrane proteins (e.g., ITGA4 and ITAGB1). Exo-CMDS demonstrated the highest reproducibility across samples, isolating specific EV subpopulations enriched in markers like CD5. SEC provided the highest yield but co-isolated significant amounts of non-vesicular particles, including lipoproteins. The findings contribute valuable insights toward standardized and reliable EV isolation practices for research and clinical applications.

Abstract Image

分离技术和冻融对血浆细胞外囊泡异质性和亚群谱的影响的系统评价
细胞外囊泡(EVs)越来越被认为是有前途的疾病生物标志物和治疗载体。然而,由于EV群体的异质性和分离技术的可变性,标准化血源性EV分离仍然具有挑战性。在这项研究中,我们系统地评估了三种不同的EV分离方法,包括不对称流场-流分离(AF4),尺寸排除色谱(SEC)和自动化离心微流控盘系统结合功能化膜(Exo-CMDS),比较了它们从新鲜冷冻和冻融血浆样品中分离EV的效率。我们采用了一种综合方法,结合邻近依赖条形码分析(PBA)进行单EV表面蛋白分析,液相色谱-质谱分析(LC-MS/MS)进行整体蛋白质组学分析,以及透射电子显微镜(TEM)和纳米颗粒跟踪分析(NTA)来评估EV产量、形态、表面蛋白表达和亚群多样性。结果表明,三种EV分离方法存在显著差异。AF4在表达高水平经典四跨蛋白(如CD81、CD9和CD151)和单代膜蛋白(如ITGA4和ITAGB1)的EV亚群中特别富集。Exo-CMDS在样品中表现出最高的重复性,分离出富含CD5等标记物的特定EV亚群。SEC提供了最高的产量,但共分离了大量的非囊泡颗粒,包括脂蛋白。这些发现为标准化和可靠的EV分离方法的研究和临床应用提供了有价值的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信