| Literature DB >> 32106990 |
Hannah M Nazri1, Maria Imran1, Roman Fischer2, Raphael Heilig2, Sanjiv Manek3, Rebecca A Dragovic1, Benedikt M Kessler2, Krina T Zondervan4, Thomas T Tapmeier5, Christian M Becker1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the feasibility of studying exosomes directly from peritoneal fluid, we isolated exosomes from endometriosis patient samples and from controls, and characterized their cargo.Entities:
Keywords: Biomarker; endometriosis; exosomes; pathogenesis; peritoneal fluid
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32106990 PMCID: PMC7057257 DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.09.032
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Fertil Steril ISSN: 0015-0282 Impact factor: 7.329
Endometriosis patient characteristics.
| Sample | Age, years | ASRM staging | Menstrual cycle phase | Experimental group | Previous history of endometriosis | Other diagnosis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 32 | 0 | Proliferative | Control | No | None |
| 2 | 39 | 0 | Secretory | Control | No | None |
| 3 | 34 | 0 | Secretory | Control | No | None |
| 4 | 38 | 0 | Proliferative | Control | No | None |
| 5 | 33 | 0 | Proliferative | Control | No | None |
| 6 | 24 | 0 | Proliferative | Control | No | None |
| 7 | 31 | 1 | Proliferative | Stage I/II | No | None |
| 8 | 28 | 1 | Secretory | Stage I/II | Yes (1 previous surgery) | None |
| 9 | 33 | 2 | Proliferative | Stage I/II | Yes (1 previous surgery) | |
| 10 | 46 | 1 | Secretory | Stage I/II | No | None |
| 11 | 29 | 2 | Secretory | Stage I/II | No | |
| 12 | 38 | 2 | Secretory | Stage I/II | No | Benign polyp |
| 13 | 32 | 1 | Secretory | Stage I/II | Yes (1 previous surgery) | None |
| 14 | 45 | 2 | Secretory | Stage I/II | Yes (1 previous surgery) | Fibroid (2.5 cm) |
| 15 | 36 | 2 | Proliferative | Stage I/II | No | Adhesions, fimbrial cysts |
| 16 | 36 | 1 | Proliferative | Stage I/II | No | Simple cyst |
| 17 | 34 | 1 | Secretory | Stage I/II | No | |
| 18 | 22 | 1 | Proliferative | Stage I/II | No | No |
| 19 | 26 | 1 | Proliferative | Stage I/II | No | None |
| 20 | 27 | 1 | Secretory | Stage I/II | No | Adhesions |
| 21 | 35 | 1 | Proliferative | Stage I/II | Yes (1 previous surgery) | None |
| 22 | 32 | 1 | Proliferative | Stage I/II | Yes (1 previous surgery) | None |
| 23 | 33 | 4 | Proliferative | Stage III/IV | Yes (1 previous surgery) | None |
| 24 | 40 | 3 | Secretory | Stage III/IV | Yes (1 previous surgery) | None |
| 25 | 43 | 4 | Proliferative | Stage III/IV | Yes (1 previous surgery) | None |
| 26 | 36 | 3 | Proliferative | Stage III/IV | No | Simple endometrial cyst |
| 27 | 48 | 3 | Secretory | Stage III/IV | No | Cysts |
| 28 | 38 | 3 | Secretory | Stage III/IV | No | None |
Note: ASRM = American Society for Reproductive Medicine.
Figure 1Isolation and characterization of exosomes from peritoneal fluid (PF). (A) Exosome isolation protocol. Peritoneal fluid (PF) was centrifuged twice to remove cells, and the supernatant was frozen for batch analysis. Upon thawing, the samples were spun to remove cell debris and larger, nonexosomal particles. The supernatants were pooled according to patient group to have sufficient material for downstream analysis. Exosomes were precipitated, and each pooled sample was fractionated by size exclusion chromatography. Fractions were analyzed for exosome and protein content, and the exosome-rich and protein-poor fractions were reunited as the experimental sample. The volume was adjusted to 700 μL. (B) Sample characteristics as per nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA) analysis. The mode is the prevalent particle size, with exosome size ranging from 100–200 nm. (C) The size and concentration of exosomes within the groups in B measured by NTA. The analysis was done separately for proliferative and secretory cycle phases. The peaks indicate the presence of exosomes. (D) The comparison of exosome concentrations within samples shows statistically significant differences between cycle phases and disease stages. ****P<.0001, two-way analysis of variance with Tukey’s post-test.
Supplemental Figure 1Protein versus particle content in fractionated sample. Plot showing the particle concentration per fraction as measured by nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA) (black bars) compared with the free protein content (grey bars). The fractions with the highest number of particles (F8–F12) were selected, thus excluding the major portion of free (i.e. not exosome-bound) protein from downstream analysis.
Figure 2Identification of exosomes within the samples. (A) Transmission electron microscopy images showing the presence of exosomes in all six sample groups. Exosomes typically show an invaginated, cup-shaped morphology as a result of sample preparation. Scale bar: 500 nm. (B) Immunoblotting of the six experimental groups. Protein was extracted from the exosome preparations and blotted with antibodies against syntenin and CD9 as markers of exosomes. Bands demonstrate the presence of exosomes in all groups (C = control; I/II = stage I/II endometriosis; III/IV = stage III/IV endometriosis). HeLa whole cell lysate was used as positive control.
Figure 3Proteomic analysis of peritoneal fluid (PF) exosome cargo revealing the distinct presence of endometriosis-associated exosomes. Exosomes isolated from the PF of patients and controls were analyzed by liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry according to disease stage. This allowed for the detection of five proteins found in both disease groups but absent in controls. The diagram depicts the number of proteins found in all experimental groups.
Supplemental Figure 2Human Proteome Map analysis of endometriosis-specific exosome protein expression. The exosome proteins found in endometriosis stage I/II and stage III/IV groups but not in controls were searched within the Human Proteome Map database (43) to indicate their origin.