| Literature DB >> 33202771 |
Leona Chitoiu1, Alexandra Dobranici2, Mihaela Gherghiceanu1,3, Sorina Dinescu2,4, Marieta Costache2,4.
Abstract
Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are membranous structures derived from the endosomal system or generated by plasma membrane shedding. Due to their composition of DNA, RNA, proteins, and lipids, EVs have garnered a lot of attention as an essential mechanism of cell-to-cell communication, with various implications in physiological and pathological processes. EVs are not only a highly heterogeneous population by means of size and biogenesis, but they are also a source of diverse, functionally rich biomolecules. Recent advances in high-throughput processing of biological samples have facilitated the development of databases comprised of characteristic genomic, transcriptomic, proteomic, metabolomic, and lipidomic profiles for EV cargo. Despite the in-depth approach used to map functional molecules in EV-mediated cellular cross-talk, few integrative methods have been applied to analyze the molecular interplay in these targeted delivery systems. New perspectives arise from the field of systems biology, where accounting for heterogeneity may lead to finding patterns in an apparently random pool of data. In this review, we map the biological and methodological causes of heterogeneity in EV multi-omics data and present current applications or possible statistical methods for integrating such data while keeping track of the current bottlenecks in the field.Entities:
Keywords: data heterogeneity; data integration; extracellular vesicles; multi-omics; systems biology
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33202771 PMCID: PMC7697477 DOI: 10.3390/ijms21228550
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Evolution of extracellular vesicles (EV) dichotomous classification according to the accumulation of recent knowledge.
| Historical Criteria | Early Knowledge | Current Knowledge |
|---|---|---|
|
| MVs range between 100 and 1000 nm, while exosomes have dimeters smaller than 100 nm [ | Classification no longer in use, MVs can be smaller than 100 nm, exosomes have an upper limit based on endosomal size (up to 150 nm or larger); “small EVs” and “medium/large EVs” nomenclature is preferred [ |
|
| Different marker profiles due to biogenesis: GTP-binding proteins (ARF6), vesicle-associated membrane protein 3 (VAMP3), proteasomes, mitochondria-related proteins for MVs, transduction or scaffolding proteins (Syntenin 1), extracellular matrix, cell adhesion, receptor binding proteins and endosome-binding proteins (TSG101) for exosomes [ | No molecular markers that could characterize specifically each EV subtype, yet validation with three markers from three different classes is required in order to evaluate tissue specificity, lipid, or membrane-binding ability and purity [ |
|
| Enriched contents according to the EV subtype: ceramides and sphingomyelins in MVs, cardiolipins in exosomes [ | Lipid ratios in EVs are not yet established [ |
|
| DNA, mRNA, ncRNA, and especially miRNA in both MVs and exosomes; origin-specific miRNA profiles for exosomes [ | Confirmed specific incorporation of RNAs into subtypes of EVs [ |
|
| Differential centrifugation or ultracentrifugation (10,000–20,000× | No “golden standard” method to isolate and/or purify EVs, the choice is to be made based on the downstream applications, recovery, and specificity rates [ |
Figure 1Evolution of interest in omics studies for EVs, according to the number of annual publications on PubMed. Stacked histogram created using R software [63].
Figure 2Correlation between EVs content in RNA, protein, lipid, and metabolites types and the multiple omics analyses that EV data integration can generate. Several areas of biology and medical research (input) generate complex genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, lipidomics, and metabolomics analysis that can contribute to understanding several biological processes and functions (output). By means of bioinformatics tools, these data will be preprocessed and then integrated in order to answer various biological questions regarding intercellular communication (A). General structure of an EV, with specific EV markers—CD9, CD63, CD80, CD81, flotillin 1, Alix, and TSG101 (B). Figure created with BioRender.com.
Figure 3Preprocessing steps for omics data. For sequencing data, reads are curated and then aligned to a reference sequence; further on, gene and transcript quantification occurs through count-based methods (A). For mass spectrometry data, ion peaklists are mapped using database entries; then, identified molecule abundance is normalized for a final biomolecule profile (B). Figure created with BioRender.com.
Figure 4Putative strategy for EV multi-omics data integration. Multi-omics profiles can be observed from a qualitative perspective, accounting for biomolecules preferentially present or absent in certain pathophysiological states, or from a quantitative perspective, accounting for biomolecule abundancies (color gradient) and functional enrichments. Integration of multi-omics data can be achieved using correlation-based methods, a strategy endorsed for a 2 by 2 analysis of omics profiles across samples (A), or network-based methods, where the diversity of omics layers can be observed in graph-like structures where biomolecules are nodes and the relationships between them are weighted edges (B). The goal of this last approach is to identify functional modules which are activated during EV-mediated cell-to-cell communication. Figure created with BioRender.com.