Valeria Rondelli1, Sally Helmy1,2, Giulia Passignani3, Pietro Parisse4,5, Dario Di Silvestre3. 1. Department of Medical Biotechnology and Translational Medicine, Università degli Studi di Milano, 20054 Segrate, Italy. 2. Biophysics Group, Physics Department, Faculty of Science, Ain Shams University, Cairo 11535, Egypt. 3. Institute for Biomedical Technologies, National Research Council (ITB-CNR), Via F.lli Cervi 93, 20054 Segrate, Italy. 4. Istituto Officina dei Materiali-National Research Council (CNR-IOM), ss.14 km 163.5 in Area Science Park, 34149 Trieste, Italy. 5. Elettra Sincrotrone Trieste S.C.p.A. ss.14 km 163.5 in Area Science Park, 34149 Trieste, Italy.
Abstract
Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are receiving increasing attention for their role in spreading both beneficial and harmful information during cell-cell communication. The complexity and heterogeneity of the origin of EVs make integrated molecular, structural, and functional studies extremely challenging but necessary at the same time. In fact, a comprehensive interdisciplinary approach is needed to correlate the features of EVs, target cells/organs, and the pathophysiological outcomes exerted by the EVs' actions. Based on these premises, after introducing a brief state-of-the-art outline on the current analytical approaches exploited to characterize EVs, this review aims to highlight the effectiveness of those studies where authors put in correlation the diverse EV data collected from different points of view. Although these examples are still just a few, they still represent an excellent starting point to be taken as a reference in the perspective for improving the correlation among EV-related clinical aspects. Of course, to fully reach this goal, several points need to be further improved and developed. Undoubtedly, new avenues in diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic applications by EVs will be initiated by integrative strategies, combining biophysical approaches, high-throughput omics technologies, and computational models.
Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are receiving increasing attention for their role in spreading both beneficial and harmful information during cell-cell communication. The complexity and heterogeneity of the origin of EVs make integrated molecular, structural, and functional studies extremely challenging but necessary at the same time. In fact, a comprehensive interdisciplinary approach is needed to correlate the features of EVs, target cells/organs, and the pathophysiological outcomes exerted by the EVs' actions. Based on these premises, after introducing a brief state-of-the-art outline on the current analytical approaches exploited to characterize EVs, this review aims to highlight the effectiveness of those studies where authors put in correlation the diverse EV data collected from different points of view. Although these examples are still just a few, they still represent an excellent starting point to be taken as a reference in the perspective for improving the correlation among EV-related clinical aspects. Of course, to fully reach this goal, several points need to be further improved and developed. Undoubtedly, new avenues in diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic applications by EVs will be initiated by integrative strategies, combining biophysical approaches, high-throughput omics technologies, and computational models.
Extracellular vesicles[1] (EVs) are particles
of nanometer dimensions (≤1 μm) harboring a functional
cargo including nucleic acids, proteins, lipids, and metabolites.
They are secreted by cells through direct budding from the plasma
membrane or by endosomal machinery. Based on the current knowledge,
classification of EVs is typically based upon their size, cellular
origin, biological function, and/or mechanism of biogenesis. In fact,
different pathways lead to different EVs, with different structures
and cargos. Following their size biogenesis correlation, they can
be divided into two main categories: microvesicles (MVs), which are
heterogeneous in diameter (∼100–1000 nm), and exosomes,
which are smaller (30–150 nm), as summarized in Figure . However, other types of EVs
also exist, including migrasomes, apoptotic bodies, oncosomes, as
well as the most recently discovered supermeres[2] and exomeres.[3]
Figure 1
Schematic representation
of the different EV subpopulations. For
a long time, size was the main characteristic used to classify EVs,
but contradictory results created the need for additional criteria
as markers related to their biogenesis. Exosomes are the small EVs
mostly originating from multivesicular bodies (MVBs) in the cell cytoplasm,
formed by inward invagination of membranes of late endosomes and successive
release into the extracellular space through fusion with the plasma
membrane, whereas large EVs (MVs, migrasomes, oncosomes) are mainly
constituted by vesicular budding from their originating cell membrane,
with each type acting for a different functional purpose. Apoptotic
bodies, on the contrary, originate from a cell which is in apoptosis.
Moreover, the exact biogenesis of the recently discovered nonmembranous
nanoparticles, exomeres and supermeres, is still debated.
Schematic representation
of the different EV subpopulations. For
a long time, size was the main characteristic used to classify EVs,
but contradictory results created the need for additional criteria
as markers related to their biogenesis. Exosomes are the small EVs
mostly originating from multivesicular bodies (MVBs) in the cell cytoplasm,
formed by inward invagination of membranes of late endosomes and successive
release into the extracellular space through fusion with the plasma
membrane, whereas large EVs (MVs, migrasomes, oncosomes) are mainly
constituted by vesicular budding from their originating cell membrane,
with each type acting for a different functional purpose. Apoptotic
bodies, on the contrary, originate from a cell which is in apoptosis.
Moreover, the exact biogenesis of the recently discovered nonmembranous
nanoparticles, exomeres and supermeres, is still debated.The first observation of EVs dates back to 1946, when Chargaff
and West observed platelet-derived particles in normal plasma; a comprehensive
review of the history of EVs authored by Couch et al. was recently
published.[4] Briefly, a few studies were
performed in the 1970s and 1980s to investigate their nature, and
during those years, EVs were essentially considered to be the recycling
bin of cells. In 1996, Raposo et al. could finally demonstrate the
functionality of these vesicles as stimulating agents of immune response.
By specifically naming the isolated vesicles as exosomes, Raposo proved
that exosomes isolated from both human and murine B lymphocytes could
provoke antigen-specific MHC class II-restricted T cell responses,
suggesting their role in antigen presentation in vivo. Since then,
the importance of EVs as intercellular communication systems has been
more and more recognized up to today’s wide and interdisciplinary
interest.Following the great interest in EVs, the number of
papers published
in the last 10 years has robustly increased, and several works have
demonstrated that EVs are secreted under different conditions by a
variety of cells, ranging from mammals to plants, where the presence
of EVs has been recently debated and demonstrated. Noteworthy, most
efforts have been concentrated on exosomes, MVs, and apoptotic bodies
that represent the types of EVs mostly investigated, as indicated
in Figure .
Figure 2
Cumulative
number of papers focusing on different EV populations
published from 1967 to April 2022 (collected from www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov). The papers were selected by the presence of EV subtype (exosomes,
microvesicles, apoptic bodies, migrasomes, oncosomes, supermeres and
exomeres) in their title.
Cumulative
number of papers focusing on different EV populations
published from 1967 to April 2022 (collected from www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov). The papers were selected by the presence of EV subtype (exosomes,
microvesicles, apoptic bodies, migrasomes, oncosomes, supermeres and
exomeres) in their title.In terms of heterogeneity, EVs differ not only in their size, lipids,
proteins, and nucleic acids content but also in their morphology,
mechanical properties, surface charge, and density. Due to the EVs’
circulation capability for reaching proximal and distal compartments,
they are vital players in the cellular communication.[5] In this scenario, EVs can interact with target cells, directly
altering their physiology or transferring surface receptors and cargos
of bioactive molecules.[6] Cell–cell
communication is an essential process in living organisms, and its
dysregulation may be responsible for various diseases. The EVs’
heterogeneous molecular cargo and its role in immunomodulation[25,27] have inspired researchers to find the link among EVs, the immune
system, and tumor development and progression.[5] Yet, the link between EVs and the immune system and the role of
EVs, in general, has been related to plenty of diseases, including
metabolic, neurodegenerative, and cardiovascular ones, so that in
parallel, due to their presence in biological fluids, their clinical
relevance for diagnostic and prognostic purposes is rapidly increasing
as is their relevance as therapeutic targets and agents.[7] Indeed, it is more and more evident that the
EVs’ chemicophysical properties correlate with the physiopathological
state of their originating cells, tissues, and organisms as “messages
in the bottle”: they could be used to discover multiple biomarkers
related to the different tissues and diseases.Systematic studies
on EVs are fundamental for a deeper understanding
of the intricate network of intercellular communication and the complex
pathophysiological roles of EVs as communicasomes.[1] Moreover, cell-to-environment communications are essential
processes in both unicellular and multicellular organisms, including
humans. In fact, recently, increasing attention has been dedicated
to the EVs as interkingdom communication mediators.To shed
light on cellular communication mechanisms mediated by
EVs, as well as on their chemicophysical features, most studies rely
on analytical methodologies for providing multifaceted information
on the EVs’ molecular cargo along with measurements for their
size and morphological and mechanical properties.Techniques
such as light scattering (LS), nanoparticle tracking
analysis (NTA), atomic force microscopy (AFM), cryogenic electron
microscopy (cryo-EM), scattering and reflectometry of X-rays and neutrons,
and vibrational spectroscopies allow the collection of information
on the size, structure, mean content, and morphology of EVs,[2,3,8−13] whereas others such as Western blot analysis, polymerase chain reaction
(PCR), next generation sequencing (NGS), and mass spectrometry (MS)
allow a comprehensive description of their molecular content[1−3,6,14−19] (see Figure ).
Figure 3
Diverse
techniques used for investigation of EVs. Their combined
application can be exploited for a more comprehensive understanding
of their characteristics/function relationship.
Diverse
techniques used for investigation of EVs. Their combined
application can be exploited for a more comprehensive understanding
of their characteristics/function relationship.Although the above-mentioned techniques are routinely used by the
scientific community, until now, studies addressing the investigation
of EVs are still showing a poor combination of different methodologies
exploring complementary aspects. Thus, even if several EV features
have been addressed, a complete comprehension of the mechanisms regulating
EVs’ genesis, spreading, and functionality remain unclear in
most of the studies, where only a partial view is presented. To fill
this gap and provide a holistic view of the features of EVs, we believe
in the need to integrate the various available techniques and methodologies.
Besides improving the understanding of the features of EVs, such combinations
may represent a boost to unravel the complex network of relationships
among EVs, their origin, and the fate of their target cells. Thus,
the goal of the present review is to emphasize the complementarity
of experimental approaches and studies in which authors integrated
them strategically to gain a comprehensive understanding of the different
aspects playing a role in EVs’ properties and functionality.
Analytical and Technical Aspects in EVs
Isolation,
Purification, and Preparation
Due to the high heterogeneity
of EV populations, sample purity
is a key premise for reliable outcomes, especially in the context
of multiple data integration. Despite the recent efforts in this field,
the isolation, purification, and preparation methodologies are not
yet fully mature and more in-depth studies are still required to improve
EV subtyping. Moreover, EVs are often isolated from body fluids (urine,
serum, plasma, saliva, tears, breast milk, gastric juice, pleural
effusions, malignant effusions, as well as in prostatic, amniotic,
cerebrospinal, synovial fluids, and bronchoalveolar lavage fluids)
which represent a source of contaminants, usually several orders of
magnitude higher than that of EV components, thus interfering with
the downstream analysis.[20] It is important
to highlight that isolation/purification methods should take into
account the sample source, volume, purity, integrity, subsequent analyses,
instrumentation, and processing time. In this context, it should also
be considered that the different methods could affect final EV composition,
and this represents a relevant aspect when different studies are evaluated,
compared, and integrated.[1]Several
current protocols for the isolation of EVs are mainly based on methods
as ultracentrifugation (UC), density gradient purification, polyethylene
glycol (PEG) precipitation, tangential flow filtration (TFF), and
size exclusion chromatography (SEC). Every method has its own pros
and cons on EV purity and may not be generally suitable for diverse
experimental purposes.[20] For example, UC,
which represents the gold standard to isolate EVs, does not separate
them from free ribonucleoproteins and lipoproteins, distorting RNA
data. Thus, some authors proposed SEC with a density cushion, whereas
others used high-resolution density gradient fractionation coupled
to immunoaffinity capture. Similarly, isolation protocols are fundamental
for proteomic analysis. Indeed, often, EVs are isolated from biological
fluids where the high dynamic range of the expressed proteins may
interfere with the effective EVs’ proteome characterization.
As a consequence, the correlation of biophysical and biochemical properties
of isolated EV subpopulations with their biological function is under
continuous debate, due to the difficulty in establishing an accepted
standard for isolation processes.[20] On
the other hand, a multifaceted characterization can allow an “ID
card” of the different cell-derived EVs to be obtained. Of
note, this strategy recently led to the discovery of two new families
of very small EVs: exomeres,[3] defined as
nonmembranous nanovesicles with a size of ≤50 nm, and supermeres,[2] even smaller particles highly enriched with cargo
molecules.If specific EVs often need to be isolated from the
originating
sample to perform molecular/structural/morphological analysis on purified
samples, sometimes their detection in a complex sample is enough for
diagnostic purposes to identify biomarkers related to specific diseases.In this context, among the variety of the existing internalization
mechanisms[7] of EVs (Figure ), understanding the exact one through which
each specific EV interacts and is internalized into its target cell
would be beneficial for the development of accurate detection techniques,
exploiting the unveiled specific interaction to detect and eventually
isolate the EV of interest. Such an approach would be of great importance,
for example, when a specific EV is being investigated and searched
for in a multicomponent complex environment, such as body fluids.
Figure 4
EV internalization
mechanisms are different and depend on the specific
EVs and the considered target cell/tissue.
EV internalization
mechanisms are different and depend on the specific
EVs and the considered target cell/tissue.
Structure of Vesicular Aggregates as a Whole
at the Mesoscale
Following the EVs’ isolation, the
knowledge of their size distribution is of great importance because
it reflects different uptake kinetics and biological functions used
to classify them. The use of complementary techniques for the size
characterization of EVs is of crucial importance for their applications
in diagnosis and therapy.[8] Indeed, different
techniques could report different size values since they rely on different
physical parameters and instrument settings. Due to the wide availability
of user-friendly instruments, LS is among the techniques mostly used
to measure the size distribution of the objects in solution; even
if in LS measurements the scattering volume is big, and the correlation
function accounts for all of the particles altogether. In this respect,
nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA) is more suitable for describing
the size distribution of EVs, allowing the particles to be counted
one by one. Nonetheless, in comparison to NTA, LS remains a useful
technique, detecting particles sized less than 50 nm, with an advantage
with respect to other complementary techniques of performing noninvasive
measurements without implying any modification of the shape of the
objects under investigation. On the other side, microscopies also
access the EVs’ morphological features. For this purpose, electron
microscopy (EM) and AFM represent the gold standard methods. In particular,
cryo-EM allows the presence of a lipid bilayer to be demonstrated,
but it is still not an easily accessible instrumentation even though
its use is increased after the Nobel Prize in 2017. On the contrary,
transmission electron microscopy (TEM) is more accessible than cryo-EM,
but it has the drawback of sample drying, fixation, and staining with
uranyl acetate, with all of the related issues of drying effects on
the final evaluation of dimensions (drying and fixation) and safety
issues (uranyl acetate). Nevertheless, both cryo-EM and TEM allow
sub-nanometer resolution, providing details not accessible by other
techniques. On the other hand, AFM presents the advantage of working
in liquid conditions, mimicking the natural EV microenvironment. Due
to its versatility, AFM has been shown to be extremely useful in verifying
size, morphology, mechanical properties, distribution of markers,
surface potential, and surface roughness. It allows the subpopulations
of EVs to be distinguished and highlights morphological and/or mechanical
changes among EVs derived from different cell lines or isolated through
different methodologies.[9,20] In this scenario, X-ray
and neutron scattering techniques add important information about
EVs’ structural properties and mean molecular composition,[10] otherwise impossible to achieve with a less
than nanometer resolution in a noninvasive way. Specifically, neutron-based
techniques, such as small-angle neutron scattering (SANS) and neutron
reflectometry (NR), are less destructive than X-ray-based ones even
if their limiting factor is a smaller accessible q range and a high background coming from the hydrogen.
Basic Constituents and Cargo Profiling
In addition
to basic structural constituents, as carriers of biomolecules,
EVs are able to transfer DNA, RNA species, proteins, lipids, and metabolites
to target cells, in both local and distal environments.[5] These extensive heterogeneous data represent
a valuable source of information suitable in performing multi-biomarker
discovery for diagnostic and EV subtyping purposes.[2,3,7] Moreover, their knowledge could help to
shed light on the biogenesis mechanisms of EVs as well as on pathophysiological
processes mediated by EVs’ signaling messages. It is well-known
that soluble molecules, such as growth factors, cytokines, chemokines,
hormones, and neurotransmitters, play key roles in intercellular communication.
Achieving these goals correlates with the important challenges that
EVs’ genomics, proteomics, and metabolomics must address, including
small size, broad dispersion in dimensions, cargo, membrane composition,
biogenesis, and the extremely heterogeneous space of biological functions.
However, to date, there is a set of advanced analytical omics technologies
available to characterize molecular profiles of biological samples,
representing a good starting point to classify all molecules composing
EVs.For basic structural constituents, such as proteins and
lipids, significant information could be retrieved using Fourier transform
infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy and Raman spectroscopy. These techniques
allow the pattern of covalent bonds to be studied by analyzing the
infrared (IR) absorptions due to vibrational modes of constituent
molecules and molecular functional groups. Intensity, position, and
width absorption bands give information on the chemical composition
of a sample and the relative concentration of its different constituents.
In particular, FTIR spectra can be used to evaluate the protein/lipid
ratio. The analysis of FTIR bands also provides information about
protein orientation and whether the form of protein is helical, sheet,
or random. FTIR spectra can also differentiate among different EV
subpopulations, collectively fingerprinting them in one single experiment.
Similar information can be retrieved by Raman spectroscopy, with the
advantage of performing measurements in a water environment, whereas
FTIR suffers from the high water absorbance and needs dehydrated or
dried samples. However, instrument advances for using FTIR in aqueous
environments were recently developed to overcome that obstacle.To investigate deeply the EVs’ molecular constituents, spectroscopic
techniques must be combined and complemented by approaches allowing
a detailed molecular profiling of DNA, RNA, proteins, lipids, and
metabolites. Due to the constant development and improvement of high-throughput
omics technologies, mainly NGS and MS-based proteomics, lipidomics,
and metabolomics in the last years, many efforts have focused on EVs’
molecular characterization.[2,3] Taking as a reference
the most investigated EV type, exosomes, it emerges that most studies
focused on shedding light on proteins and RNA species, whereas less
studies have been dedicated to DNA and lipids and even less to metabolites,
as summarized in Figure .
Figure 5
Cumulative number of papers focusing on exosome omics profiling
from 1999 to April 2022 (collected from www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov); papers were selected by the presence of “exosomes”
AND different classes of molecules in their title.
Cumulative number of papers focusing on exosome omics profiling
from 1999 to April 2022 (collected from www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov); papers were selected by the presence of “exosomes”
AND different classes of molecules in their title.For DNA, only recently has the evidence emerged that EVs
contain
single-stranded DNA (ssDNA), double-stranded DNA (dsDNA), and mitochondrial
DNA. In particular, exomeres and chromatimeres have been championed
as potential carriers of large amounts of cell-free DNA (cfDNA), yet
their function remains poorly understood.[3] In fact, in comparison to proteins and RNAs, whole-genome sequencing
was recently used to investigate EV-transferred DNA species with few
studies available to date.[21] Nevertheless,
extracellular cfDNA is attracting interest from the scientific community
due to its potential as a biomarker, mainly in cancers, as well as
its putative implication in regulating signaling pathways and pathophysiological
processes. On the other hand, extracellular DNA release can occur
through apoptotic and necrotic cell death. For this reason, major
efforts are required to establish DNA origins and properties. The
achievement of this goal is currently pushing the development of appropriate
protocols to discriminate EVs’ DNA origin from passive product
of DNA fragmentation. For example, a major topic concerns which EV
populations are actually associated with DNA. Moreover, EV DNA packaging
(both genomic and mitochondrial), the correlation between DNA structure
and pathophysiological states, and its function in recipient cells
represent some of the crucial topics that need to be addressed in
forthcoming future studies to broaden and consolidate our knowledge
of EVs as a whole.Unlike DNA, in the last 10 years, a special
interest has been directed
to the variety of existing RNA molecules (micro-RNAs (miRNA), messenger
RNAs (mRNA), ribosomal RNA (rRNA), transfer RNA (tRNA), small nucleolar
RNA (snoRNA), small nuclear (snRNA), long noncoding RNA (lncRNA),
long intergenic noncoding RNA (lincRNA), and noncoding RNA (ncRNA))
carried by EVs.[14] RNAs are internalized
by target cells, where, in cooperation with other molecules, they
affect gene regulatory networks and thus the transcriptional and translational
processes. However, the functional role of the RNA cargo seems mainly
driven by miRNAs and lncRNAs, whereas the role of others, including
tRNAs, mRNA fragments, or rRNA, remains unclear. Several studies correlated
the horizontal transfer of EV miRNA cargo with controlled tumor growth,
affecting the microenvironment and promoting metastases by reprogramming
of recipient cells.[2] In addition, it has
also been proved that the EVs’ miRNAs and lncRNAs, have a role
in tumor drug resistance,[2] cardioprotection,[6] and neurogenesis, as well as in regulating gene
expression, along with affecting obesity or diabetes.[14] The most popular method to characterize RNA molecules is
the quantitative reverse transcriptase PCR (qRT-PCR). It is simple
and low-cost, requires a small amount of sample, and does not require
bioinformatics skills. However, its major drawback concerns the limited
heterogeneity of RNA populations that may be explored as it is primarily
used to measure the amount of specific RNAs following a proper design
of primers that target the sequence of interest, thus it does not
fit with gene expression measurements on a global scale. On the contrary,
NGS has been proven to be a method for a comprehensive analysis of
the RNA families.Similar to RNAs, in the past decade, EVs have
been the subjects
of several proteomic studies aimed at deepening their isolation, analysis
and characterization. Among EVs’ transported molecules, proteins
represent the main effectors of biological functions and, together
with miRNA, directly regulate the transcriptional program of recipient
cells. Their knowledge and correlation are therefore fundamental for
understanding EVs’ function, biogenesis, and discovery of markers
for diagnostic purposes,[6] as well as EV
subtype discrimination since protein cargo of EVs is both cell- and
disease-type-dependent.[15] In order to perform
EV subtype discrimination, the most popular approaches rely on the
combination of biophysical findings and the measurement of common
markers, including CD63, CD9, and CD81. On the contrary, the EVs’
proteome cargo is investigated by high-throughput analytical approaches.
Although EVs’ proteomic investigations have also been successfully
performed by gel-based approaches, the increasing progress in both
liquid chromatography (LC) and high-resolution MS has driven more
and more the use of gel-free methodologies.[16] They proved their effectiveness for qualitative and quantitative
proteome profiling of EVs, as well as for the identification of post-translational
modifications (PTMs). Providing information on the activation status
of various proteins may affect protein–protein interactions,
as well as their targeting to EVs.[1]The main MS-based approaches used for proteomics studies, including
for EVs, are categorized as discovery and targeted proteomics to address
relative and absolute quantification (by both label and label-free
strategies). However, while discovery proteomics is usually applied
for protein profiling and quantitative analysis, targeted quantitative
proteomics, as selective reaction monitoring (SRM) and sequential
window acquisition of all theoretical fragment ion spectra mass spectrometry
(SWATH-MS), aim at validating protein expression of a preselected
group of proteins/peptides.[16] All of these
approaches, combined with complementary biophysical findings, are
useful for improving the characterization of EV subtypes as well as
for correlating them to pathophysiological states. To reach this goal,
major limitations in using proteomics of EVs are still related to
their heterogeneity even after isolation. In fact, it has been observed
that highly purified EV subtypes from the same cellular origin are
biochemically and functionally distinct. Thus, also in this case,
the combination of complementary strategies to classify homogeneous
EV subpopulations represents the proper approach for improving the
correlation between chemicophysical, molecular, and clinical aspects.[2,3,6,16,17] In addition, such an integrative strategy
is crucial to extract reliable markers for effective monitoring of
EVs’ isolation, their subtyping, and more importantly for developing
diagnostic tools.Unlike RNAs and proteins, much less information
is available about
the content of cargo in terms of metabolites. However, EVs are already
recognized as independent metabolic units that can modulate systemic
changes in recipient cells. Experimental hardships represent the major
limitation in studying the EVs’ metabolomics;[17] in fact, EVs’ cargo includes sub-nanomolar concentrations
of small metabolites (carbohydrates, amino acids, nucleotides, enzymatic
cofactors, and lipids) whose enrichment is preferable prior to spectrometry
assays. In this scenario, lipids are one of the most structurally
heterogeneous classes of biomolecules present in EVs due to their
permutations in head groups and fatty acid chains. If from one side
lipids have a role in EV structure and stability, they are also bioactive
mediators.[22] It has been shown that different
classes of lipids are present in EVs, whose cargo is enriched in lipids
such as glycerophospatidylcholines and glycerophospatidylethanolamines.
Eicosanoids have been associated with EVs involved in inflammatory
processes; it is well-established that eicosanoids are implicated
in multiple diseases, including asthma and cancer, or biological processes,
such as hemostasis, immunity, and reproduction. For example, regarding
breast cancer, some studies correlated a different lipid composition
in EVs from breast cancer cell lines, as well as tumor cells with
low metastatic potential versus high metastatic potential.[22] At an analytical level, MS-lipidomics allow
high sensitivity, specificity rates, and an accurate measurement of
the molecular weight of the analyzed lipids. However, overlaps in
different classes of lipids are still posing great challenges in exact
identifications. More recently, thin layer chromatography (TLC) coupled
with mass spectrometry systems such as matrix-assisted laser desorption
ionization time-of-flight (MALDI-TOF) has also been described as an
efficient method in discriminating the lipidomic content of EVs. Notably,
this approach has been used not only to identify but also to differentiate
the lipid composition of EVs’ subpopulations.A specification
must be done to clarify that the above-mentioned
omics approaches are not usually applied to distinguish the molecules
embedded into the EVs’ membranes from those transported into
the EVs’ core, unless a subfractionation or a targeting analysis
is performed. As an example, recently, Xu et al.[23] focused their attention on exosome surface-exposed membrane
proteins (surfaceome) after their proteolytic shaving. An estimation
of the relative amounts of lipids and proteins embedded or not in
EV membranes can also be performed by techniques such as FTIR or NR
by comparing the results obtained by studying dry samples (where all
molecules from solution are deposited) and EVs derived from single
supported membranes in water environment (where only the EV’s
membrane is fused).
Case Studies: From Biophysics
to Profiling Integration
The increase of studies on EVs that
we are observing in recent
years is spurring the need for new techniques and devices that can
surmount experimental roadblocks, as detailed in the previous sections.
As already established, the urgent need for scientific research performed
on EVs, linking their importance to different physiological and pathological
effects, triggered the emergence of thousands of research articles
aiming at their characterization as well as diagnostic and therapeutic
investigation approaches, as schematized in Figure .
Figure 6
Word association from manuscript titles containing
“extracellular
vesicles” OR “EVs” showing the most significant
fields currently under study in the ongoing research of EVs collected
from www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (number of papers = 6909).
Word association from manuscript titles containing
“extracellular
vesicles” OR “EVs” showing the most significant
fields currently under study in the ongoing research of EVs collected
from www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (number of papers = 6909).Following what is reported in the Introduction, and in line with this review’s topic, in this section, we
will introduce some examples where different experimental approaches
were integrated with the purpose to exploit their complementarities
and to provide a holistic view of the investigated EV systems.Based on these premises, two recent studies allowed the discovery
of new EV families: exomeres[3] and supermeres.[2] In the first study,[3] published in 2018, Zhang et al. employed the asymmetric-flow field-flow
fractionation (AF4) to resolve two exosome subpopulations (Exo-L,
Exo-S) and to discover an abundant population of nonmembranous nanoparticles
called “exomeres” (∼35 nm). By integrating data
from different omics approaches, the authors found that Exo-S, Exo-L,
and exomeres had distinct N-glycosylation, protein, lipid, DNA and
RNA profiles, and biophysical properties. Specifically, exomeres were
enriched in proteins involved in metabolism, mainly glycolysis and
mTORC1 pathways, as well as in proteins associated with coagulation
and hypoxia. Moreover, they were enriched in proteins controlling
glycan-mediated protein folding control (CALR) and glycan processing
(MAN2A1, HEXB, GANAB), suggesting a role in modulating glycosylation
in distant targeted cells. In agreement with structural studies that
suggested exomeres as non-encapsulated particles, membrane-associated
proteins were poorly represented. On the contrary, Hsp90-b was highly
present in exomeres, playing a role as a potential marker. For this
purpose, glycomic, lipidomic, and genomic analyses provided further
sources of data to select additional molecular signatures. For instance,
high levels of triglycerides and ceramides were found in exomeres,
whereas DNA analysis revealed that DNA packaging was correlated with
tumor-type ones.[3]In a more recent
study,[2] Zhang et al.
discovered another class of extracellular nanoparticles, called “supermeres”,
morphologically distinct from exomeres. By combining sequential high-speed
ultracentrifugation protocols, fluid-phase AFM and TEM imaging, they
revealed that the morphological structure of supermeres was distinct
from small EVs (sEVs), nonvesicular (NV) nanoparticles, and exomeres
derived from two human colorectal cancer (CRC) cell lines, DiFi and
HCA-7-derived spiky colony, and from the human breast cancer cell
line MDA-MB-231. Using liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass
spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), the authors pointed their attention to the
supermeres’ protein content, finding that it was enriched in
proteins related to metabolism. In addition to enzymes involved in
fatty-acid metabolism, enrichment analysis of differentially expressed
proteins (DEPs) showed that many enzymes involved in glycolysis were
highly enriched in supermeres compared to sEVs and exomeres. In particular,
enolase2 (ENO2) was highly associated with supermeres. This marked
enrichment of glycolytic enzymes drove the authors to examine if and
how supermeres could alter the metabolism of recipient cells. They
demonstrated that the addition of cancer-cell-derived supermeres to
recipient cells increases lactate secretion and is able to transfer
cetuximab resistance and decrease hepatic lipids and glycogen in vivo.
At the protein level, supermeres also showed high levels of TGFBI
in DiFi supermeres and the second-most abundant in PANC-1 supermeres,
whereas the glycolytic enzyme enolase1 (ENO1) was the most abundant
in the PANC-1 and MDA-MB-231 supermeres. However, the heat shock protein
HSPA13 was enriched in the supermeres of all analyzed cell lines (DiFi,
PANC-1, MDA-MB-231, SC, and human renal epithelial (HREC)), suggesting
a potential role as a protein marker. In addition to the proteome,
the authors found a distinctive supermere small extracellular RNA
list with a relatively high percentage of snRNAs. In this scenario,
exomeres and supermeres showed miRNA expression patterns closely related
but distinct from that of sEVs and specific cells. The
most highly abundant and enriched miRNAs in exomeres included miR-92a-3p,
miR-1247-5p, and miR-10a-5p, and the authors validated the expression
of supermere-enriched miR-1246 and miR-675, further revealing signatures
for this new class of EVs. As a completion of this multimodal study,
the authors investigated the uptake dynamics in vitro of sEVs, exomeres,
and supermeres derived from DiFi cells in treated MDA-MB-231 cells.
They found that supermeres were efficiently taken up by multiple organs,
including the liver, lung, colon, heart, and brain. Thus, as functional
agents of intercellular communication, they represent candidate biomarkers
and therapeutic targets in several disease states including cancer,
cardiovascular disease, Alzheimer’s disease, and SARS-CoV-2
infection.Another example of fruitful analytical integration
comes from Wong’s
group in the field of cancer biomarkers. Wong and colleagues performed
a variety of investigations complementing biochemical and biophysical
aspects to obtain get a comprehensive description of exosomes from
salivary glands, proposed as cancer biomarkers.[12] Immunoblotting, flow cytometry, and fluorescence-activated
cell sorting (FACS) analysis showed the enrichment of the vesicles
with CD63, while the presence of 509 core mRNA transcripts was monitored
through microarray analysis. The transfer of mRNAs, from the salivary
EVs to the human oral keratinocytes, was observed using labeled vesicles
with fluorescent lipid BODIPY-PC. The proteomic analysis proved the
expression of annexin A1, annexin A2, moesin, and OS-9 proteins, and
it suggested the influence of salivary EVs on oral keratinocytes.
qRT-PCR was also used to investigate the presence of specific modulated
transcripts in their cargo. Recently,[9] authors
investigated their substructure using ultrasensitive low-force AFM,
correlated with field emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM),
to interpret the exosomes’ nanoscale structures under varying
forces. EVs, sized around 70–100 nm and showing trilobed morphology,
were observed to show a reversible mechanical deformation displaying
distinct elastic properties. Force spectroscopy with anti-CD63 IgG-functionalized
AFM tips proved the detection of the antigen CD63, an important cancer
biomarker, on their surface. Moreover, by implanting mice with human
lung cancer H460 cells expressing hCD63-GFP, the authors monitored
the circulating tumor cells in vivo. Finally, electric-field-induced
release and measurement (EFIRM) along with qRT-PCR could monitor human
GAPDH mRNA in salivary EVs in the tumor-bearing mice, proving the
possibility to exploit biomarkers in the salivary EVs for biomedical
applications.[18]Moving toward the
integration of structural, biochemical, and biophysical
techniques to highlight the specific behavior of EVs, it is worth
citing the work of Romancino et al.[24] as
a multidisciplinary effort to investigate the effects of palmitoylation
on the membrane organization of small extracellular vesicles. The
fruitful combination of bioinformatics tools, biochemical assays,
Western blots, AFM, small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS), and SANS
allowed the biological function of S-palmitoylation in the regulation
of Alix proteins to be understood. Palmitoylation facilitates the
interactions among EV-specific regulators as CD9 and helps in maintaining
the proper structural organization of the membranes. In particular,
they were able to distinguish the effects of chemical inhibition of
palmitoylation on small (sEV) and large (lEV) extracellular vesicles.
Inhibition of palmitoylation mainly influences the sEV population
with an induced larger secretion as monitored by AFM, DLS, and NTA
analyses and with a modification of lipid bilayer organization as
revealed by SAXS and SANS data. Beyond the biological relevance, this
work was the first to exploit neutron scattering techniques for the
analysis of extracellular vesicles.Such techniques have been
recently exploited to shed new light
on the mechanisms by which EVs recognize and bind to specific cells
in the case of mesenchymal stem cell derived EVs for therapeutic applications.
Indeed, addressing the mechanisms of fusion and release of cargo is
necessary not only to understand but also to mimic and engineer new
delivery strategies. Building up on the work done by Gimona’s
group on potency assays for mesenchymal stem cell derived EVs,[25] Perissinotto and Rondelli et al.[10] applied a set of complementary techniques to
unveil new aspects of mesenchymal stem cell derived EV characteristics
and internalization mechanisms. After the chemicophysical characteristics
of EVs by NTA, cryo-EM, and multiplexed surface marker analysis, a
combination of SAXS, SANS, and NR were used to assess the membrane
bilayer structure and lipid/protein ratio (by volume) of sEV membranes.
Specifically, the lipid/protein ratio of the EV membranes was obtained
by NR from EV-derived supported bilayers, which was the contrast to
neutrons defined by the sum of the different molecule contributions.
On the same paper, the authors also investigated EVs’ fusion
mechanisms, where a combination of AFM, NR, and SANS allowed the details
of sEVs’ internalization into synthetic lipid membranes containing
raft domains to be described. This joint exploration allowed them
to observe that EVs interacting with artificial lipid bilayers break
and form EV–membrane domains, whose areas increase over time,
suggesting the formation of initial nucleation seeds which act as
docking sites for other EVs from solution. The lipid phase borders
present on the artificial bilayers (raft-like structures) seem to
act as preferential docking sites from where the different sEV components
spread with different kinetics in the surrounding bilayer. Further
insights on the fusion mechanism of such systems have been explored
by the same groups by means of differential scanning calorimetry and
dynamic light scattering,[26] and these experiments
allowed them to observe after fusion of sEVs with artificial lipid
vesicles (LUVs) an increased rigidity of the bilayer, a flattening
of the membrane with an increase in size of the LUVs, a decrease in
the lateral mobility of the lipids, and a decreased transition cooperativity,
as a sign of an increased membrane parcellation. Such experiments
are important not only because they shed light on the likelihood of
EVs to interact with specific domains with respect to others but also
because they allowed the investigation of the effects of EVs on target
cell membranes, opening perspectives in this field that are applicable
to EVs of different origin.With a similar perspective, Montis
et al.[11] combined different experimental
techniques to investigate the interaction
of superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIONs) with supported
lipid bilayers, synthetic and derived from EVs extracted from prostatic
tumors (from the murine cell line TRAMP-C2). Several complementary
techniques, such as quartz crystal microbalance (QCM), X-ray reflectivity,
grazing-incidence small-angle X-ray scattering (GISAXS), AFM, and
confocal microscopy, were used to perform this study. The authors
could prove that the adhesion of SPIONs on the lipid membranes was
strongly encouraged for EV-derived supported lipid bilayers, possibly
due to their higher compositional complexity with respect to the synthetic
ones, which leads to a significant enhancement in the response to
the adhesion of nano-objects. In addition, they could observe that
supported membrane features are changing in response to SPION interactions.
The successful use of such complementary physical techniques in this
study could strengthen the understanding of the structural and physicochemical
features of the EV-derived supported lipid bilayers, thus leading
to a significant view of their possible manipulation as 2D platforms
for biosensor applications.
Discussion and Conclusions
Based on our recent literature searches, a real integration of
diverse techniques aiming at investigating the complementary aspects
characterizing EVs, in terms of structure, morphology, molecular cargo,
and function, has been rarely performed. Although it usually happens
when different groups with specific expertise carry out complementary
investigations on the same EV systems, highlighting the importance
of merging their findings, few are the cases where in the same study
the authors presented the investigation of EVs in all their aspects.[2,3,10,12] Due to the orthogonality of the different fields, requiring complementary
expertise, instruments, computational tools, as well as funds, the
snapshot of the current situation is not surprising. However, the
case studies we have put under the magnifying lens in this review
unveiled how integration strategies are productive in terms of results
and findings. As emerged by our in-depth analysis, a comprehensive
strategy was demonstrated to be effective in discovering new EV classes,[2,3] as well as in describing EV-specific internalization mechanisms.[10,13] The use of complementary techniques strengthened the understanding
on the structural and physicochemical features of the EV-derived supported
lipid bilayers,[10,11] which are of interest not only
for their characterization but also for their beneficial manipulation
and exploitation as platforms. The application of structural techniques,[24] linked to molecular profiling, allowed researchers
to investigate the direct effect of changes in cells as inhibition
of palmitoylation on cell–cell communication by affecting the
secreted EV population.In this scenario, moreover, the multiomics
approaches adopted,
associated with biophysical techniques, led to the discovery of multiple
and diverse markers which represent a valuable source of information
to be exploited for diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic purposes.[6,9,12] Indeed, it is not a coincidence
that most of the case studies presented here, as well as other studies
cited in our review, focused on tumor investigation.[2,3,8,11,12,16−18,23] In this field, in fact, the EVs’
role in cellular communication has often been associated with the
favoring of the tumor microenvironment, as well as with the induction
of drug resistance, thus representing potential therapeutic targets
of interest.Although the correlation of multiple omics data
reflecting the
EVs’ cargo content represents a key aspect for extracting distinctive
signatures,[2,3] as well as to predict the effect of EVs
on target cells,[6,27] their integration with other
types of EV data and findings can improve the understanding of the
relationships among structures, cargos, and functions mediated by
EVs. The need for data integration originates from the holistic view
of the cell’s response to different conditions, and data-derived
system biology approaches could represent a powerful strategy for
a comprehensive understanding of the EVs’ complexity and their
role in cellular communication.[1,6,27,19] The major challenges in evaluating
EVs as biological systems concern their high dimensionality (many
players involved) and connectivity (many connections between players).
To address these difficulties, as for omics profiles, holistic methods
based on network analysis represent a tool for associating heterogeneous
data and unraveling the tangle of molecular relationships in which
EVs may be involved. These methods can be used to assess modulatory
relationships among omics layers. In this scenario, it has already
been reported that vesicular molecules (RNAs, proteins, lipids, and
metabolites) are physically interconnected into functional modules
involved in several and well-defined biological processes, including
vesicle-mediated transport, cytoskeletal organization and immune systems.[1,19] However, integrating transcriptomics data with proteomics and metabolomics
is per se a challenge in cell lines or tissues due to their low correlation.
Rather, a more attractive strategy should rely on the correlation
between EVs’ structure/cargo molecules with the effect predicted
and observed in target cells, as showed in some studies were authors
combined the EVs omics profiles experimentally defined, with network
models (including protein–protein interactions (PPIs), miRNA
targets) reconstructed from knowledge accumulated and stored in specific
repositories.[1,6,27,19] Noteworthy, in this context, novel approaches
put an emphasis on the topology of the reconstructed network models
with the purpose to detect pathways affected by the treatment of EVs
and hubs as molecules targeted by EVs.[6,27]In the
future, we expect that new techniques will be developed
or adapted to investigate EVs in order to get faster and more accurate
findings. Regardless, with the employed technologies, relevant efforts
must be focused on improving the isolation and purification methods[20] which represent an essential prerequisite for
accuracy. With the same purpose, specific efforts still have to be
made concerning the standardization of sample collection and processing.
It is also fundamental to obtain reproducible data sets to be compared
for integrative purposes. Improved reporting of experimental design
and results is as well an additional aspect potentially affecting
reproducibility. Moreover, the availability and consistency of previously
reported data are major limitations for validation and meta-analysis
studies. Although data heterogeneity can be substantially induced
by the different protocols applied, large collections of data can
yield more statistically significant observations. In this scenario,
the multidisciplinary interest in investigating EVs has driven the
development of databases that store experimental transcriptomics,
proteomics, metabolomics, and lipidomics data sets, as well as isolation,
preparation, and characterization protocols. Some of them, such as
Vesiclepedia (http://www.microvesicles.org/) and ExoCarta (http://exocarta.org/) are specifically dedicated to EVs, whereas others, such as EVmiRNA
(http://bioinfo.life.hust.edu.cn/EVmiRNA), are related to specific EV molecules. In addition, for proteomics,
repositories like MassIVE (https://massive.ucsd.edu/ProteoSAFe/static/massive.jsp), PRIDE (https://www.ebi.ac.uk/pride/), and PeptideAtlas (http://www.peptideatlas.org) could represent a further source of experimental data on EVs, whereas
GEO (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/) serves the same function for genomic and transcriptomic profiles.
On the other hand, plenty of resources (www.pathguide.org) are dedicated
to network models, including protein–protein interactions,
metabolic pathways, signaling pathways, and gene regulatory networks,
representing key information for understanding the complex relationships
that govern cellular communication. Such stored information and their
continued accumulation and improvement in accuracy represent an opportunity
for researchers in connecting previous findings, designing their studies,
and driving them to a comprehensive holistic view of the EVs considered.
Undoubtedly, new avenues in diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic
applications of EVs will be opened by following these integrative
strategies, combining biophysical approaches, high-throughput omics
technologies, and models taking into account the players involved
in cellular communication, including EVs, targets, and mediators.
Authors: Shivani Sharma; Haider I Rasool; Viswanathan Palanisamy; Cliff Mathisen; Michael Schmidt; David T Wong; James K Gimzewski Journal: ACS Nano Date: 2010-04-27 Impact factor: 15.881
Authors: Rong Xu; David W Greening; Maoshan Chen; Alin Rai; Hong Ji; Nobuhiro Takahashi; Richard J Simpson Journal: Proteomics Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 3.984
Authors: Susannah Hallal; Ali Azimi; Heng Wei; Nicholas Ho; Maggie Yuk Ting Lee; Hao-Wen Sim; Joanne Sy; Brindha Shivalingam; Michael Edward Buckland; Kimberley Louise Alexander-Kaufman Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2020-07-03 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Qin Zhang; Dennis K Jeppesen; James N Higginbotham; Ramona Graves-Deal; Vincent Q Trinh; Marisol A Ramirez; Yoojin Sohn; Abigail C Neininger; Nilay Taneja; Eliot T McKinley; Hiroaki Niitsu; Zheng Cao; Rachel Evans; Sarah E Glass; Kevin C Ray; William H Fissell; Salisha Hill; Kristie Lindsey Rose; Won Jae Huh; Mary Kay Washington; Gregory Daniel Ayers; Dylan T Burnette; Shivani Sharma; Leonard H Rome; Jeffrey L Franklin; Youngmin A Lee; Qi Liu; Robert J Coffey Journal: Nat Cell Biol Date: 2021-12-09 Impact factor: 28.213
Authors: Yvonne Couch; Edit I Buzàs; Dolores Di Vizio; Yong Song Gho; Paul Harrison; Andrew F Hill; Jan Lötvall; Graça Raposo; Philip D Stahl; Clotilde Théry; Kenneth W Witwer; David R F Carter Journal: J Extracell Vesicles Date: 2021-12
Authors: Martina Tetti; Vittorio Forestiero; Lucio Barile; Silvia Monticone; Jacopo Burrello; Vanessa Biemmi; Sara Bolis; Margherita Alba Carlotta Pomatto; Martina Amongero; Dario Di Silvestre; Pierluigi Mauri; Giuseppe Vassalli; Giovanni Camussi; Tracy Ann Williams; Paolo Mulatero Journal: Hypertension Date: 2021-07-26 Impact factor: 10.190