Mijin Kim1,2, Hee-Woong Yun1,2, Do Young Park3, Byung Hyune Choi4, Byoung-Hyun Min1,2,3. 1. 1Department of Molecular Sciences and Technology, Ajou University, 206, World cup-ro, Yeongtong-gu, Woncheon-dong, Suwon, 16499 Republic of Korea. 2. 2Cell Therapy Center, Ajou University Medical Center, 206 World Cup-ro, Yeongtong-gu, Suwon, 16499 Republic of Korea. 3. 3Department of Orthopedic Surgery, School of Medicine, Ajou University, 206 World Cup-ro, Yeongtong-gu, Suwon, 16499 Republic of Korea. 4. 4Department of Biomedical Sciences, Inha University College of Medicine, 100 Inha-ro, Nam-gu, Incheon, 22212 Republic of Korea.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mass production of exosomes is a prerequisite for their commercial utilization. This study investigated whether three-dimensional (3D) spheroid culture of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) could improve the production efficiency of exosomes and if so, what was the mechanism involved. METHODS: We adopted two models of 3D spheroid culture using the hanging-drop (3D-HD) and poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) (poly-HEMA) coating methods (3D-PH). The efficiency of exosome production from MSCs in the 3D spheroids was compared with that of monolayer culture in various conditions. We then investigated the mechanism of the 3D spheroid culture-induced increase in exosome production. RESULTS: The 3D-HD formed a single larger spheroid, while the 3D-PH formed multiple smaller ones. However, MSCs cultured on both types of spheroids produced significantly more exosomes than those cultured in conventional monolayer culture (2D). We then investigated the cause of the increased exosome production in terms of hypoxia within the 3D spheroids, high cell density, and non-adherent cell morphology. With increasing spheroid size, the efficiency of exosome production was the largest with the least amount of cells in both 3D-HD and 3D-PH. An increase in cell density in 2D culture (2D-H) was less efficient in exosome production than the conventional, lower cell density, 2D culture. Finally, when cells were plated at normal density on the poly-HEMA coated spheroids (3D-N-PH); they formed small aggregates of less than 10 cells and still produced more exosomes than those in the 2D culture when plated at the same density. We also found that the expression of F-actin was markedly reduced in the 3D-N-PH culture. CONCLUSION: These results suggested that 3D spheroid culture produces more exosomes than 2D culture and the non-adherent round cell morphology itself might be a causative factor. The result of the present study could provide useful information to develop an optimal process for the mass production of exosomes.
BACKGROUND: Mass production of exosomes is a prerequisite for their commercial utilization. This study investigated whether three-dimensional (3D) spheroid culture of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) could improve the production efficiency of exosomes and if so, what was the mechanism involved. METHODS: We adopted two models of 3D spheroid culture using the hanging-drop (3D-HD) and poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) (poly-HEMA) coating methods (3D-PH). The efficiency of exosome production from MSCs in the 3D spheroids was compared with that of monolayer culture in various conditions. We then investigated the mechanism of the 3D spheroid culture-induced increase in exosome production. RESULTS: The 3D-HD formed a single larger spheroid, while the 3D-PH formed multiple smaller ones. However, MSCs cultured on both types of spheroids produced significantly more exosomes than those cultured in conventional monolayer culture (2D). We then investigated the cause of the increased exosome production in terms of hypoxia within the 3D spheroids, high cell density, and non-adherent cell morphology. With increasing spheroid size, the efficiency of exosome production was the largest with the least amount of cells in both 3D-HD and 3D-PH. An increase in cell density in 2D culture (2D-H) was less efficient in exosome production than the conventional, lower cell density, 2D culture. Finally, when cells were plated at normal density on the poly-HEMA coated spheroids (3D-N-PH); they formed small aggregates of less than 10 cells and still produced more exosomes than those in the 2D culture when plated at the same density. We also found that the expression of F-actin was markedly reduced in the 3D-N-PH culture. CONCLUSION: These results suggested that 3D spheroid culture produces more exosomes than 2D culture and the non-adherent round cell morphology itself might be a causative factor. The result of the present study could provide useful information to develop an optimal process for the mass production of exosomes.
Authors: Thomas J Bartosh; Joni H Ylöstalo; Arezoo Mohammadipoor; Nikolay Bazhanov; Katie Coble; Kent Claypool; Ryang Hwa Lee; Hosoon Choi; Darwin J Prockop Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2010-07-19 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Ruenn Chai Lai; Fatih Arslan; May May Lee; Newman Siu Kwan Sze; Andre Choo; Tian Sheng Chen; Manuel Salto-Tellez; Leo Timmers; Chuen Neng Lee; Reida Menshawe El Oakley; Gerard Pasterkamp; Dominique P V de Kleijn; Sai Kiang Lim Journal: Stem Cell Res Date: 2010-01-04 Impact factor: 2.020
Authors: Hadi Valadi; Karin Ekström; Apostolos Bossios; Margareta Sjöstrand; James J Lee; Jan O Lötvall Journal: Nat Cell Biol Date: 2007-05-07 Impact factor: 28.824
Authors: Irina A Potapova; Glenn R Gaudette; Peter R Brink; Richard B Robinson; Michael R Rosen; Ira S Cohen; Sergey V Doronin Journal: Stem Cells Date: 2007-03-29 Impact factor: 6.277
Authors: Maria Eldh; Karin Ekström; Hadi Valadi; Margareta Sjöstrand; Bob Olsson; Margareta Jernås; Jan Lötvall Journal: PLoS One Date: 2010-12-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Leonora Balaj; Chantal M Boulanger; David R F Carter; Ewoud B Compeer; Gisela D'Angelo; Samir El Andaloussi; Jacky G Goetz; Julia Christina Gross; Vincent Hyenne; Eva-Maria Krämer-Albers; Charles P Lai; Xavier Loyer; Alex Marki; Stefan Momma; Esther N M Nolte-'t Hoen; D Michiel Pegtel; Hector Peinado; Graça Raposo; Kirsi Rilla; Hidetoshi Tahara; Clotilde Théry; Martin E van Royen; Roosmarijn E Vandenbroucke; Ann M Wehman; Kenneth Witwer; Zhiwei Wu; Richard Wubbolts; Frederik J Verweij; Guillaume van Niel Journal: Nat Methods Date: 2021-08-26 Impact factor: 28.547
Authors: Yuri M Efremov; Irina M Zurina; Viktoria S Presniakova; Nastasia V Kosheleva; Denis V Butnaru; Andrey A Svistunov; Yury A Rochev; Peter S Timashev Journal: Biophys Rev Date: 2021-07-13
Authors: Xilal Y Rima; Jingjing Zhang; Luong T H Nguyen; Aaron Rajasuriyar; Min Jin Yoon; Chi-Ling Chiang; Nicole Walters; Kwang Joo Kwak; L James Lee; Eduardo Reátegui Journal: Lab Chip Date: 2022-06-28 Impact factor: 7.517