Methodological variations affect the release of VEGF in vitro and fibrinolysis' time from platelet concentrates.

Blood Concentrates (BCs) are autologous non-transfusional therapeutical preparations with biological properties applied in tissue regeneration. These BCs differ in the preparation method, in fibrin network architecture, growth factors release as well as in platelet/cell content. Methodological changes result in distinct matrices that can compromise their clinical effectiveness. The present study evaluated the influence of different g-forces and types of tubes in the release of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) from platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) as a function of time. The PRF-like samples were obtained with three g-forces (200, 400, and 800 x g) for 10 minutes in pure glass tubes or in polystyrene-clot activator tubes. Scanning and Transmission electron microscopy was used to morphometric analyzes of PRF's specimens and flow cytometry was used to quantify VEGF slow release until 7 days. Our results showed that platelets were intact and adhered to the fibrin network, emitting pseudopods and in degranulation. The fibrin network was rough and twisted with exosomic granulations impregnated on its surface. An increase in the concentration of VEGF in the PRF supernatant was observed until 7 days for all g forces (200, 400 or 800 xg), with the highest concentrations observed with 200 x g, in both tubes, glass or plastic. Morphological analyzes showed a reduction in the diameter of the PRF fibers after 7 days. Our results showed that g-force interferes with the shape of the fibrin network in the PRF, as well as affect the release of VEGF stored into platelets. This finding may be useful in applying PRF to skin lesions, in which the rapid release of growth factors can favor the tissue repair process. Our observations point to a greater clarification on the methodological variations related to obtaining PRF matrices, as they can generate products with different characteristics and degrees of effectiveness in specific applications.

Introduction

The fibrin matrix is a natural clot that acts as a primordial scaffold for the conduction of tissue repair [1, 2]; it is a polymeric three-dimensional network formed after fibrinogen activation by enzymatic peptide cleavage [3]. The polymerization occurs instantly by contact with tissue glycoproteins or by thixotropic oxidation in exogenous mechanisms [4].

The biological basis of hemostasis and tissue repair served for the development of obtaining operational methodologies for non-transfusion therapeutic blood concentrates. These methodologies provide a selective concentration of platelets, mononuclear leukocytes, and glycoproteins in the fibrin matrix, elements that are directly related to regenerative responses [5]. These blood concentrates have been used in dentistry and medicine as a surgical adjuvant to provide early tissue repair [6, 7].

Low-speed centrifugation methods generated blood concentrates enriched with platelets from selective blood separation, and methodological advances have provided platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) from blood samples without anticoagulant, which is characterized by elasticity and mechanical resistance and for concentrating mononuclear leukocytes, glycoproteins and growth factors [8, 9].

Currently, platelet concentrates have been the focus of many basic and clinical studies, [10], with the majority of scientific articles mainly addressing its therapeutic potential as a surgical adjuvant in dentistry, such as peri-implantology and maxillofacial surgery [11-14]. Besides, further studies on the treatment of chronic wounds and muscle-tendinous lesions in humans have introduced the topic in the medical field as a promising therapeutic potential [15-21].

The autologous blood concentrates obtained by PRF Standard [22], A-PRF™ [23, 24], Intraspin L-PRF™ [25, 26] CGF™ [27-30], PRGF™ [31, 32], Fibrin System™ [33] and others [34-39] show methodological variations in centrifugation time, g-force, type of rotor and model of the centrifuge, as well as in the types of tubes for blood collection. All together, these methods for obtaining platelet concentrates show differences in the organization of the fibrin matrix and in the release kinetics of growth factors [40-42].

Considering that methodological variations may imply the morphological and biochemical characteristics of PRF, the present study aimed to describe the morphology and the influence of g-force on VEGF release up to seven days after its production.

Materials and methods

Individuals and ethical aspects

The participants were healthy, non-smoker, adult women (n = 5) who agreed to donate 120 mL of blood to the study. The present study observed all ethical standards for scientific research with humans in conformity with the Declaration of Helsinki (World Medical Association Recommendation 2013). The Research Ethics Committee approved the study of the Medical School of the University of Brasilia, Brazil, under number 055468/2015.

Formation of blood concentrates from whole blood

In order, blood samples were obtained pure glass tubes type 10 mL (Montserrat, Brazil) and polystyrene clot activator tubes (Greiner Bio-One, Brazil) by vacuum collection. Samples' blood was collected and immediately transferred to 25o rotor fixed-angle centrifuge FibrinFuge25 (Monserrat, Brazil) centrifugated with 200, 400, and 800 x g at 10 minutes.

Ultrastructural analyses by scanning electron microscopy

PRF clot’s fragment obtained by 200, 400, and 800 x g / 10 minutes were separated and conditioned in plastic tubes free of additives (Greiner Bio-One, Brazil). Immediately after PRF production and after 7, 14 or 21 days at 37 oC, the specimens were sectioned (body, buffy coat and proximal sediment) and fixed in 2% glutaraldehyde solution and 2% paraformaldehyde in 0.1M sodium cacodylate buffer, pH 7.2. After being fixed, they were washed in 0.1M sodium cacodylate buffer, post-fixed in osmium tetroxide (1%) in sodium cacodylate buffer, then the specimens were dehydrated for 15 minutes in solutions with increasing concentrations of acetone (30%, 50%, 70%, 90% and 3x 100%). Then, the specimens were dried to the critical point with CO2 and metalized with gold. For analyzes by scanning electron microscopy (JEOL 7001F, Tokyo, Japan), the images (20 to 20000 x of magnification) were analyzed using GIMP 2.10 software (Cockroach Labs, USA). To the morphometric study we evaluated the diameter of twenty fibers using the digital planimeter of Autocad software (Autodesk, USA).

Ultrastructural analyses by transmission electron microscopy

For transmission electron microscopy, analyzes PRF fragments in the buffy coat region were fixed and processed as previously reported. After being impregnated with PolyBed 812 resin (PolySciences, USA) the fragments were sectioned on an ultramicrotome to obtain the images (Jeol 100CXII, Japan). Qualitative analyzes where performed in digital images using the GIMP 2.10 software (Cockroach Labs, USA).

VEGF quantification

The PRF of individuals were maintained up to 7 days at 37°C and after 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 or 7 days an aliquot of the serum (200 μL) was cryopreserved (-80° C) until analyzes. Quantification of VEGF was performed using the bead array (CBA) cytometry method, used in the commercial kit (VEGF Flex Set human kit and BD ™ CBA cell signaling main kit, USA), according to the manufacturer's specifications on the flow cytometer LSR Fortessa ™ (BD ™, USA). FCAP Array ™ software version 3.0 (BD ™, USA) was used to calculate the concentration of VEGF based on a curve of the pattern of this growth factor. Results were expressed in pg/mL.

Statistical analyzes

The statistical analysis used Bartlett’s test for equal variances and the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test for normal distribution before comparative tests. The analyzes were performed by the pared t test or Wilcoxon to compare samples of normally or non-normally distributed data, respectively, and linear regression. The GraphPadPrism 8.0 software package (GraphPad, USA) was employed for statistical tests and graphical presentation of the data. Differences with a two-tailed value of p < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results

Morphological analyzes

The qualitative analyzes represented in Fig 1, showed that the PRF (Fig 1A) is divided into three distinct regions, the upper part being formed by a fibrin network (B), the intermediate part (medium body) containing platelets immersed in the fibrin network (C) and the lower part (buffy coat) containing the largest fraction of platelets and leukocytes (D).

Fig 1

Photography showing in A the macroscopy of three regions of PRF (upper body, medium body and buffy coat) and eletrocmicrographs (B to M). Observe the ultrastructural arrangements of the three regions of PRF (B, C, D), activated platelet (E) with pseudopods and degranulation process (F, G, H). Also, observe the fibrin surface with polymeric chains and impregnated superficial nanoparticles (I, J). In K, L, M are shown interspersed plankton diatoms frustules in PRF matrix obtained by Vacuette™ plastic tube with a clot activator.

The platelets were intact and adhered to the fibrin network, emitting pseudopods and in degranulation, as shown in Fig 1E, 1F, 1G and 1H. On the surface of the platelets were observed rough and agglomerated bodies with dimensions of 3.0 ± 2.0 μm. Leukocytes were closely associated with platelets and presented a rough surface. The fibrin network exhibited variations in its three-dimensional organization, were rough and twisted, in addition to exhibiting polymeric chains with exosomatic granulations impregnated on the surface (Fig 1I and 1J).

Fig 1K, 1L and 1M show the PRF obtained with the SiO2 platelet activator in which the planktonic diatoms frustoles are interspersed in the matrix.

Quantification of VEGF

Our results showed an increase in the concentration of VEGF in the PRF supernatant over the 7 days of evaluation and for all g forces (200, 400 or 800 x g), with the highest concentrations observed with 200 x g, in both tubes, glass (linear regression, r2 > 0.96, p < 0.0001) or plastic (linear regression, r2 > 0.86, p < 0.001) (Fig 2A and 2B). However, the morphometric analyzes showed a reduction in the diameter of the PRF fibers after 7 days at 37° C (Fig 2C and 2D) and qualitatively, these analyzes indicated a decrease in the density of the fibrin network after the 7 days (Fig 2E2, 2F2 and 2G).

Fig 2

Kinetics of VEGF release from the fibrin network to the PRF supernatant obtained in a glass (A) or plastic (B) tube over 7 days. In C and D are observed the paired analyzes of the total VEGF concentration (C) and the diameter of the fibrin fibers (D). In E, F, G are observed the fibrin network images obtained with 200 x g (E), 400 x g (F) or 800 x g (G) at t0 and t7, indicating a decrease in the density of the fibrin network after 7 days. (E2, F2, G2). The results showed greater VEGF release (linear regression) and smaller diameter of fibrin fibers after 7 days of PRF at 37°C (paired analyzes).

Discussion

The study of fibrinolysis has two strands of high relevance. Within the vessels, this physiological process quickly prevents thromboembolism, while in the extravascular environment this process is slow because fibrin acts structurally in the injured tissue [43, 44]. Considering the application of PRF in tissue repair, the elucidation of how fibrinolysis occurs in the extravascular environment can favor its therapeutic application.

For the investigation of fibrinolysis, qualitative and quantitative methods of high relevance in the clinical sphere are available to differentiate pathological conditions and indicate the appropriate therapy, which commonly involve anti-fibrinolytics, such as α2-antiplasmin and α2-macroglobulin [45-49]. In this study, the objective was to understand the kinetic of fibrinolysis obtained with different g forces in vitro.

Our results showed that the variation in g-force for the production of PRF interferes with the shape of the fibrin network and in the VEGF release. Considering that the platelet granules were attached on the surface of the fibrin fibers, as shown in the images obtained by SEM, it is speculated that the lower g force applied (200 x g) is sufficient to promote the platelet activation and the exosomes release. Furthermore, the lower g-force promote highest concentration of VEGF and decrease of the fibrin fibers diameter. This finding may be useful in applying PRF to skin lesions, in which the rapid release of growth factors can favor the tissue repair process. Besides, this fibrin network can be used as a drug system delivery [50, 51], acting to different therapeutic applications.

It has been reported that the slow release of growth factors from the PRF is fundamental to support the therapeutic application of this platelet concentrate [52, 53]. Other studies have shown that the concentration of growth factors varies according to the production protocol of PRF [54, 55], mainly related to the g-force and the type of tube used.

Our results demonstrated that the use of the glass tube provided higher concentrations of VEGF released in all g-force bands, especially after 72 hours, when compared to those obtained in plastic tubes with clot activator. Bonazza et al., 2016 [29] when comparing the effects of three different types of tubes in the PRF matrix, obtained by the CGF™ method, showed difference in the platelets and leukocytes dispersion and the fibrin density mesh observable by immunohistochemical assays. The fibrinolysis experiment demonstrated that the concentration of growth factors increases as the fibrin fibers reduce their thickness and demonstrate detachment of particles from their surface. Thus, the lower concentration of VEGF in the exudate can have two meanings; 1) the peptide was degraded early; 2) the peptide is firmly adhered and protected in the fibrin matrix bed.

The present experiment reproduced the immunoassay methodologies reported in the literature and served to demonstrate that PRF matrices have supraphysiological concentrations of growth factors. In vitro experiments are very limited since they are performed under controlled environmental and metabolic conditions, unlike in vivo behavior.

Activated platelets and leukocytes release growth factors in the medium where they are inserted. In this way, SEM in large increases was able to demonstrate the impregnation of nanometric particles attached to fibrin fibers. Dohan, et al., 2010 [7] presented the concept of the three-dimensional model of the fibrin matrix that accommodates growth factors by adhesion. In Fig 2, we identified this configuration in a real model by SEM micrographs.

The relationship between the PRF’s morphology and the VEGF release showed the interdependence of these processes. However, the released concentration, by itself, does not constitute any intrinsic advantage of the method of obtaining since the cell signaling resulting from growth factors is performed in the three-dimensional bed itself. The highest concentrations observed in vitro occurred precisely in the period of fibrinolysis [48]. It is also worth considering that these concentrations released from the matrix in vitro do not faithfully reproduce what occurs in tissue beds in vivo, where the action of enzymes, oxidizing agents, and migratory cells interfere with the physiological activity of these growth factors. Even because the fibrin matrix exerts a proteolytic protection mechanism on these proteins, keeping them functionally adhered for the cellular signaling that is fundamental during tissue repair [49].

Another important microscopic observation was the impregnation of different particles of silica in the PRF matrix obtained in plastic tubes with clot activators. Tubes from commercial brands presented silicon extracts from algalic sources, one of them being a composition of diatom shells. Clot activators act as oxidizing agents for in vitro diagnostic purposes [56-58].

In Vitro Devices (IVDs), despite being sterile to ensure the reliability of laboratory tests, they have limitations for medical use. According to international health standards, processed products, including blood and blood products, as well as handling devices, must have a Medical Device (MD) classification [8]. In Europe, the EU regulation 2017/745 of the European Parliament and the Council already recommends the disuse of tubes manufactured for laboratory purposes and the adoption of devices with MD classification.

The company Silfradent in Santa Sofia, Italy, is one of the pioneers in this adaptation and already has these devices with such classification. However, despite this international sanitary adequacy, there have been no reports of cytotoxicity or therapeutic failures in the literature over the past 20 years that could be associated with the use of IVD tubes [57, 59, 60]. Tsujino et al., 2019 [58] indicated potential risks for the use of tubes containing amorphous silica as a clot activator [52], and Kawase et al., 2020 [60] demonstrated cytotoxicity in periosteal cells by contact with the silica impregnated in the tubes. There is a strong trend towards standardization for the use of tubes that are free of chemical additives.

The manufacture of plastic tubes with clot activators supplied a demand for biosafety in the field of laboratory diagnosis [61]. The glass tubes serve to accelerate the clot retraction; however, they are susceptible to breakage during handling and centrifugation, increasing the risk of accidents at work. In this way, the use of plastic tubes with clot activators, in laboratory logistics, accelerate the formation of the clot and reduce the risks of these accidents [4].

Bowen and Remaley, 2014 [62] clarified that laboratory analytical methods are susceptible to variations in additives used in the manufacture of tubes for in vitro diagnostics, thus interfering with the results of the analyzes. Contaminating agents such as lead and other heavy metals present in the rubbers and lubricants used to close the tubes can affect the accuracy of laboratory tests.

Some companies involved in the sale of centrifuges and supplies for obtaining blood concentrates, in compliance with international health regulations, already have in their sterile portfolio tubes in specific packages with the indicative description for in vivo use [28].

Despite this international health trend regarding the indication of equipment and supplies classified as a medical device (MD), there is no indication in the international literature of inefficiency, toxic or immunogenic implications due to the use of IVD tubes containing clot activators in obtaining PRF matrices.

Due to the glass tube presented the better kinetic pattern in the slow release of VEGF, it can be indicated for obtaining the PRF matrices for non-transfusion therapeutic use with safety. Studies using experimental models in vivo and in vitro are necessary to clarify the cytotoxic potential of these activators.

Conclusion

The microscopic and flow cytometric experiments showed the effect of the different experimental conditions, where the smallest g-forces were more promising concerning cell composition and VEGF release. Our results showed that g-force interferes with the shape of the fibrin network in the PRF, as well as affect the VEGF release. This finding may be useful in applying PRF to skin lesions, in which the rapid release of growth factors can favor the tissue repair process. Our observations point to a greater clarification on the methodological variations related to obtaining PRF matrices.

13 Jul 2020

PONE-D-20-14559

Methodological variations affect the release of VEGF in vitro and fibrinolysis' time from platelet concentrates

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Kückelhaus,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Aug 27 2020 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Amitava Mukherjee, ME, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Thank you for including your competing intersests statement; "The authors have declared that no competing interests exist."

We note that one or more of the authors are employed by a commercial company:

Innovacorium Inc

Please provide an amended Funding Statement declaring this commercial affiliation, as well as a statement regarding the Role of Funders in your study. If the funding organization did not play a role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript and only provided financial support in the form of authors' salaries and/or research materials, please review your statements relating to the author contributions, and ensure you have specifically and accurately indicated the role(s) that these authors had in your study. You can update author roles in the Author Contributions section of the online submission form.

Please also include the following statement within your amended Funding Statement.

“The funder provided support in the form of salaries for authors [insert relevant initials], but did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The specific roles of these authors are articulated in the ‘author contributions’ section.”

If your commercial affiliation did play a role in your study, please state and explain this role within your updated Funding Statement.

2. Please also provide an updated Competing Interests Statement declaring this commercial affiliation along with any other relevant declarations relating to employment, consultancy, patents, products in development, or marketed products, etc.

Within your Competing Interests Statement, please confirm that this commercial affiliation does not alter your adherence to all PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials by including the following statement: "This does not alter our adherence to  PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.” (as detailed online in our guide for authors http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests) . If this adherence statement is not accurate and  there are restrictions on sharing of data and/or materials, please state these. Please note that we cannot proceed with consideration of your article until this information has been declared.

Please include both an updated Funding Statement and Competing Interests Statement in your cover letter. We will change the online submission form on your behalf.

Please know it is PLOS ONE policy for corresponding authors to declare, on behalf of all authors, all potential competing interests for the purposes of transparency. PLOS defines a competing interest as anything that interferes with, or could reasonably be perceived as interfering with, the full and objective presentation, peer review, editorial decision-making, or publication of research or non-research articles submitted to one of the journals. Competing interests can be financial or non-financial, professional, or personal. Competing interests can arise in relationship to an organization or another person. Please follow this link to our website for more details on competing interests: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests

3. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: This paper describes the formation of platelet rich fibrin using different G forces and different tube materials. Outcomes are described as fibrin appearance (using EM) and VEGF formation (CBA) in supernatant. The investigators measured VEGF formation as indicator of quality of PRF formed. It would be useful to measure other biochemical indicators such as PDGF, markers on platelets in the matrix. Additionally, the FBE of the blood from which the PRF was formed should also be reported either in the manuscript or in the supplementary. The language in the paper is difficult to read at times (e.g. parameters = methods, obtention of blood-derived concentrates by peripheral venipuncture and centrifugation = formation of blood concentrates from whole blood).

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

8 Sep 2020

Response to Reviewer #1:

Considering the reviewer's suggestion about measuring other biochemical indicators, we highlight that it is no longer possible to perform new experiments, since the samples were discarded after the VEGF analyzes. However, we emphasize that the suggestion will be considered in future experiments.

Regarding the revision of the language, we inform that grammatical changes were made in the ressubmission, in order to improve the text.

21 Sep 2020

Methodological variations affect the release of VEGF in vitro and fibrinolysis' time from platelet concentrates

PONE-D-20-14559R1

Dear Dr. Kückelhaus,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Amitava Mukherjee, ME, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

24 Sep 2020

PONE-D-20-14559R1

Methodological variations affect the release of VEGF in vitro and fibrinolysis' time from platelet concentrates

Dear Dr. Kückelhaus:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Professor Dr. Amitava Mukherjee

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE