| Literature DB >> 26714455 |
Bradley Whitehead1,2, LinPing Wu3, Michael Lykke Hvam1,2, Husnu Aslan1, Mingdong Dong1, Lars Dyrskjøt4, Marie Stampe Ostenfeld4, Seyed Moein Moghimi3, Kenneth Alan Howard1,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Exosomes have been implicated in tumour progression and metastatic spread. Little is known of the effect of mechanical and innate immune interactions of malignant cell-derived exosomes on endothelial integrity, which may relate to increased extravasation of circulating tumour cells and, therefore, increased metastatic spread.Entities:
Keywords: complement activation; endothelial disruption; extracellular vesicles; extravasation; metastatic cell-derived exosomes; nanomechanical properties
Year: 2015 PMID: 26714455 PMCID: PMC4695623 DOI: 10.3402/jev.v4.29685
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Extracell Vesicles ISSN: 2001-3078
Fig. 1Nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA) size distributions of vesicles harvested from (a) FL3, (b) HCV-29 and (c) T24 cells. (d) Vesicle number harvested assessed by NTA normalized to cell number; vesicles produced per cell were not significantly different among any cell line, determined by Student's paired t-tests. (e) Resistance to anoikis assay assessing malignant capability of HCV-29, FL3 and T24 cells. p-values between pairs of groups were determined by Student's paired t-tests, *p<0.05; N.S., not significant.
Fig. 2Atomic force microscopy height images and nanomechanical maps showing stiffness and adhesion profile of exosomes derived from non-malignant HCV-29 (a), malignant non-metastatic T24 (b), and malignant metastatic FL3 (c) cell-derived exosomes. Analysis performed on n=50 vesicles per cell line.
Mechanical properties of malignant and non-malignant cell exosomes
| Exosome type | Stiffness (MPa±sd) | Adhesion (pN±sd) |
|---|---|---|
| Non-malignant (HCV-29) | 1527±313 | 803±471 |
| Malignant Non-metastatic (T24) | 95±34 | 477±160 |
| Malignant Metastatic (FL3) | 280±25 | 219±46 |
Fig. 3xCELLigence-RTCA TEER measurements showing (a) human umbilical vein endothelial cell (HUVEC) monolayer formation followed by transendothelial electrical resistance measurements post-application of non-malignant (HCV-29), malignant non-metastatic (T24) and malignant metastatic (FL3) cell-derived exosomes (representation of high dose administration). (b) Quantification of slopes at T=7 h post-administration. (c) Viability of HUVEC cells post-exosome administration assessed by lactate dehydrogenase release assay; viability results were not significantly different for exosome treated or control cells by Student's paired t-test, p<0.05. (d) Transport of fluorescently labelled malignant and non-malignant cell-derived exosomes through HUVEC monolayers. (e) Flow cytometric analysis of HUVEC monolayer cells after application of fluorescently labelled exosomes. (f) Schematic of fluorescent exosome transwell assay. Statistical analyses were determined by Student's paired t-test, to calculate significance (*p<0.05, **p<0.01, N.S., not significant).
Fig. 4Exosome-mediated complement activation in a typical human serum. (a,b) Concentration-dependent complement activation of different exosomes in human serum. Zymosan (1 mg/mL) was used as positive control for monitoring complement activation, which yielded 31.3 µg/mL SC5b-9 and 0.75 µg/mL C5a, respectively. (c,d) Contribution of Ca-sensitive pathways and the alternative pathway turnover in exosome-mediated complement activation in the same serum as panel (a). In (a) and (b) *p<0.05 comparing T24 and FL3 with the corresponding incubations of HCV-29 exosomes. In (a) and (b) p<0.05 for all samples compared with the background level (blank) with the exception of HCV-29 at the concentration of 7.35×108 exosomes/mL of serum. *p<0.05 for selected pairs. In (c) and (d), p<0.05 compared with Blank (control). Statistical analyses were determined by Student's paired t-test, to calculate significance (*p<0.05).