Cargando…

A Comparison of Blood Plasma Small Extracellular Vesicle Enrichment Strategies for Proteomic Analysis

Proteomic analysis of small extracellular vesicles (sEVs) poses a significant challenge. A ‘gold-standard’ method for plasma sEV enrichment for downstream proteomic analysis is yet to be established. Methods were evaluated for their capacity to successfully isolate and enrich sEVs from plasma, minim...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Turner, Natalie P., Abeysinghe, Pevindu, Kwan Cheung, Keith A., Vaswani, Kanchan, Logan, Jayden, Sadowski, Pawel, Mitchell, Murray D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9229025/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35736799
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/proteomes10020019
_version_ 1784734631881342976
author Turner, Natalie P.
Abeysinghe, Pevindu
Kwan Cheung, Keith A.
Vaswani, Kanchan
Logan, Jayden
Sadowski, Pawel
Mitchell, Murray D.
author_facet Turner, Natalie P.
Abeysinghe, Pevindu
Kwan Cheung, Keith A.
Vaswani, Kanchan
Logan, Jayden
Sadowski, Pawel
Mitchell, Murray D.
author_sort Turner, Natalie P.
collection PubMed
description Proteomic analysis of small extracellular vesicles (sEVs) poses a significant challenge. A ‘gold-standard’ method for plasma sEV enrichment for downstream proteomic analysis is yet to be established. Methods were evaluated for their capacity to successfully isolate and enrich sEVs from plasma, minimise the presence of highly abundant plasma proteins, and result in the optimum representation of sEV proteins by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. Plasma from four cattle (Bos taurus) of similar physical attributes and genetics were used. Three methods of sEV enrichment were utilised: ultracentrifugation (UC), size-exclusion chromatography (SEC), and ultrafiltration (UF). These methods were combined to create four groups for methodological evaluation: UC + SEC, UC + SEC + UF, SEC + UC and SEC + UF. The UC + SEC method yielded the highest number of protein identifications (IDs). The SEC + UC method reduced plasma protein IDs compared to the other methods, but also resulted in the lowest number of protein IDs overall. The UC + SEC + UF method decreased sEV protein ID, particle number, mean and mode particle size, particle yield, and did not improve purity compared to the UC + SEC method. In this study, the UC + SEC method was the best method for sEV protein ID, purity, and overall particle yield. Our data suggest that the method and sequence of sEV enrichment strategy impacts protein ID, which may influence the outcome of biomarker discovery studies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9229025
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92290252022-06-25 A Comparison of Blood Plasma Small Extracellular Vesicle Enrichment Strategies for Proteomic Analysis Turner, Natalie P. Abeysinghe, Pevindu Kwan Cheung, Keith A. Vaswani, Kanchan Logan, Jayden Sadowski, Pawel Mitchell, Murray D. Proteomes Article Proteomic analysis of small extracellular vesicles (sEVs) poses a significant challenge. A ‘gold-standard’ method for plasma sEV enrichment for downstream proteomic analysis is yet to be established. Methods were evaluated for their capacity to successfully isolate and enrich sEVs from plasma, minimise the presence of highly abundant plasma proteins, and result in the optimum representation of sEV proteins by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. Plasma from four cattle (Bos taurus) of similar physical attributes and genetics were used. Three methods of sEV enrichment were utilised: ultracentrifugation (UC), size-exclusion chromatography (SEC), and ultrafiltration (UF). These methods were combined to create four groups for methodological evaluation: UC + SEC, UC + SEC + UF, SEC + UC and SEC + UF. The UC + SEC method yielded the highest number of protein identifications (IDs). The SEC + UC method reduced plasma protein IDs compared to the other methods, but also resulted in the lowest number of protein IDs overall. The UC + SEC + UF method decreased sEV protein ID, particle number, mean and mode particle size, particle yield, and did not improve purity compared to the UC + SEC method. In this study, the UC + SEC method was the best method for sEV protein ID, purity, and overall particle yield. Our data suggest that the method and sequence of sEV enrichment strategy impacts protein ID, which may influence the outcome of biomarker discovery studies. MDPI 2022-06-01 /pmc/articles/PMC9229025/ /pubmed/35736799 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/proteomes10020019 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Turner, Natalie P.
Abeysinghe, Pevindu
Kwan Cheung, Keith A.
Vaswani, Kanchan
Logan, Jayden
Sadowski, Pawel
Mitchell, Murray D.
A Comparison of Blood Plasma Small Extracellular Vesicle Enrichment Strategies for Proteomic Analysis
title A Comparison of Blood Plasma Small Extracellular Vesicle Enrichment Strategies for Proteomic Analysis
title_full A Comparison of Blood Plasma Small Extracellular Vesicle Enrichment Strategies for Proteomic Analysis
title_fullStr A Comparison of Blood Plasma Small Extracellular Vesicle Enrichment Strategies for Proteomic Analysis
title_full_unstemmed A Comparison of Blood Plasma Small Extracellular Vesicle Enrichment Strategies for Proteomic Analysis
title_short A Comparison of Blood Plasma Small Extracellular Vesicle Enrichment Strategies for Proteomic Analysis
title_sort comparison of blood plasma small extracellular vesicle enrichment strategies for proteomic analysis
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9229025/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35736799
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/proteomes10020019
work_keys_str_mv AT turnernataliep acomparisonofbloodplasmasmallextracellularvesicleenrichmentstrategiesforproteomicanalysis
AT abeysinghepevindu acomparisonofbloodplasmasmallextracellularvesicleenrichmentstrategiesforproteomicanalysis
AT kwancheungkeitha acomparisonofbloodplasmasmallextracellularvesicleenrichmentstrategiesforproteomicanalysis
AT vaswanikanchan acomparisonofbloodplasmasmallextracellularvesicleenrichmentstrategiesforproteomicanalysis
AT loganjayden acomparisonofbloodplasmasmallextracellularvesicleenrichmentstrategiesforproteomicanalysis
AT sadowskipawel acomparisonofbloodplasmasmallextracellularvesicleenrichmentstrategiesforproteomicanalysis
AT mitchellmurrayd acomparisonofbloodplasmasmallextracellularvesicleenrichmentstrategiesforproteomicanalysis
AT turnernataliep comparisonofbloodplasmasmallextracellularvesicleenrichmentstrategiesforproteomicanalysis
AT abeysinghepevindu comparisonofbloodplasmasmallextracellularvesicleenrichmentstrategiesforproteomicanalysis
AT kwancheungkeitha comparisonofbloodplasmasmallextracellularvesicleenrichmentstrategiesforproteomicanalysis
AT vaswanikanchan comparisonofbloodplasmasmallextracellularvesicleenrichmentstrategiesforproteomicanalysis
AT loganjayden comparisonofbloodplasmasmallextracellularvesicleenrichmentstrategiesforproteomicanalysis
AT sadowskipawel comparisonofbloodplasmasmallextracellularvesicleenrichmentstrategiesforproteomicanalysis
AT mitchellmurrayd comparisonofbloodplasmasmallextracellularvesicleenrichmentstrategiesforproteomicanalysis