Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28114422›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

A Comparative Study of Serum Exosome Isolation Using Differential Ultracentrifugation and Three Commercial Reagents.

Inas Helwa, Jingwen Cai, Michelle D Drewry, Arthur Zimmerman, Michael B Dinkins, Mariam Lotfy Khaled, Mutsa Seremwe, W Michael Dismuke, Erhard Bieberich, W Daniel Stamer and 2 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 377 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
377citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

377 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Liquid Biopsy in Endometriosis: A Systematic Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Diagnostic value of exosomes in patients with liver cancer: a systematic review.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

317 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Inas HelwaDepartment of Cellular Biology and Anatomy, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia, United States of America.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9294-9277
Jingwen CaiDepartment of Cellular Biology and Anatomy, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia, United States of America.
Michelle D DrewryDepartment of Cellular Biology and Anatomy, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia, United States of America.
Arthur ZimmermanDepartment of Cellular Biology and Anatomy, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia, United States of America.
Michael B DinkinsDepartment of Neuroscience and Regenerative Medicine, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia, United States of America.
Mariam Lotfy KhaledDepartment of Cellular Biology and Anatomy, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia, United States of America.
Mutsa SeremweDepartment of Cellular Biology and Anatomy, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia, United States of America.
W Michael DismukeDepartment of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.
Erhard BieberichDepartment of Neuroscience and Regenerative Medicine, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia, United States of America.
W Daniel StamerDepartment of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.
Mark W HamrickDepartment of Cellular Biology and Anatomy, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia, United States of America.
Yutao LiuDepartment of Cellular Biology and Anatomy, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia, United States of America.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2870-4504

Funding

THE LEPTIN-IGF1 AXIS IN MUSCULOSKELETAL AGINGP01AG036675 · NIA · AUGUSTA UNIVERSITY · PI CARLOS M. ISALES · 2011 to 2026
$31.5M
Function of ceramide in neurodegenerative diseaseR01AG034389 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY · PI BIEBERICH, ERHARD · 2010 to 2020
$3.6M
Gene Discovery in Familial KeratoconusR01EY023242 · NEI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI LIU, YUTAO · 2013 to 2023
$3.4M
Regulation of cilia by ceramideR01NS095215 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY · PI BIEBERICH, ERHARD · 2016 to 2019
$1.4M
Role of exosomes in amyloid clearance and plaque formation in AD.F32AG044954 · NIA · AUGUSTA UNIVERSITY · PI DINKINS, MICHAEL · 2013 to 2016
$168k
Shear stress regulation of barrier function in Schlemm's canalF32EY023468 · NEI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI DISMUKE, WILLIAM MICHAEL · 2014 to 2015
$117k
NEI NIH HHS F32 EY023468NEI NIH HHS R01 EY023242NIA NIH HHS F32 AG044954NIA NIH HHS P01 AG036675NIA NIH HHS R01 AG034389NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS095215
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Exosomes play a role in cell-to-cell signaling and serve as possible biomarkers. Isolating exosomes with reliable quality and substantial concentration is a major challenge. Our purpose is to compare the exosomes extracted by three different exosome isolation kits (miRCURY, ExoQuick, and Invitrogen Total Exosome Isolation Reagent) and differential ultracentrifugation (UC) using six different volumes of a non-cancerous human serum (5 ml, 1 ml, 500 μl, 250 μl, 100 μl, and 50 μl) and three different volumes (1 ml, 500 μl and 100 μl) of six individual commercial serum samples collected from human donors. The smaller starting volumes (100 μl and 50 μl) are used to mimic conditions of limited availability of heterogeneous biological samples. The isolated exosomes were characterized based upon size, quantity, zeta potential, CD63 and CD9 protein expression, and exosomal RNA (exRNA) quality and quantity using several complementary methods: nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA) with ZetaView, western blot, transmission electron microscopy (TEM), the Agilent Bioanalyzer system, and droplet digital PCR (ddPCR). Our NTA results showed that all isolation techniques produced exosomes within the expected size range (40-150 nm). The three kits, though, produced a significantly higher yield (80-300 fold) of exosomes as compared to UC for all serum volumes, except 5 mL. We also found that exosomes isolated by the different techniques and serum volumes had similar zeta potentials to previous studies. Western blot analysis and TEM immunogold labelling confirmed the expression of two common exosomal protein markers, CD63 and CD9, in samples isolated by all techniques. All exosome isolations yielded high quality exRNA, containing mostly small RNA with a peak between 25 and 200 nucleotides in size. ddPCR results indicated that exosomes isolated from similar serum volumes but different isolation techniques rendered similar concentrations of two selected exRNA: hsa-miR-16 and hsa-miR-451. In summary, the three commercial exosome isolation kits are viable alternatives to UC, even when limited amounts of biological samples are available.

Indexed as

Blotting, WesternExosomesHumansIndicators and ReagentsMicroscopy, Electron, TransmissionNanoparticlesPolymerase Chain ReactionProteomicsRNAUltracentrifugationIndicators and ReagentsRNA

Identifiers

PMID28114422
PMCPMC5256994

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.