Xu Shihan, Zhang Zhengrong, Melvin Bridgette C, Basu Ray Nibedita, Ikezu Seiko, Ikezu Tsuneya
Department of Neuroscience Mayo Clinic Florida Jacksonville Florida USA.
Regenerative Science Graduate Program Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science Jacksonville Florida USA.
J Extracell Biol. 2024 Oct 16;3(10):e70016. doi: 10.1002/jex2.70016. eCollection 2024 Oct.
The characterization of single extracellular vesicle (EV) has been an emerging tool for the early detection of various diseases despite there being challenges regarding how to interpret data with different protocols or instruments. In this work, standard EV particles were characterized for single CD9, single CD81 or double CD9/CD81 tetraspanin molecule positivity with two single EV analytic technologies in order to optimize their EV sample preparation after antibody labelling and analysis methods: NanoImager for direct stochastic optical reconstruction microscopy (dSTORM)-based EV imaging and characterization, and Flow NanoAnalyzer for flow-based EV quantification and characterization. False positives from antibody aggregates were found during dSTORM-based NanoImager imaging. Analysis of particle radius with lognormal fittings of probability density histogram enabled the removal of antibody aggregates and corrected EV quantification. Furthermore, different machine learning models were trained to differentiate antibody aggregates from EV particles and correct EV quantification with increased double CD9/CD81 population. With Flow NanoAnalyzer, EV samples were prepared with different dilution or fractionation methods, which increased the detection rate of CD9/CD81 EV population. Comparing the EV phenotype percentages measured by two instruments, differences in double positive and single positive particles existed after percentage correction, which might be due to the different detection limit of each instrument. Our study reveals that the characterization of individual EVs for tetraspanin positivity varies between two platforms-the NanoImager and the Flow NanoAnalyzer-depending on the EV sample preparation methods used after antibody labelling. Additionally, we applied machine learning models to correct for false positive particles identified in imaging-based results by fitting size distribution data.
尽管在如何用不同协议或仪器解释数据方面存在挑战,但单个细胞外囊泡(EV)的表征已成为各种疾病早期检测的新兴工具。在这项工作中,使用两种单个EV分析技术对标准EV颗粒进行了表征,以确定其单个CD9、单个CD81或双CD9/CD81四跨膜蛋白分子的阳性情况,从而优化抗体标记后的EV样品制备和分析方法:用于基于直接随机光学重建显微镜(dSTORM)的EV成像和表征的NanoImager,以及用于基于流式的EV定量和表征的流式纳米分析仪。在基于dSTORM的NanoImager成像过程中发现了抗体聚集体产生的假阳性。通过对概率密度直方图进行对数正态拟合分析颗粒半径,能够去除抗体聚集体并校正EV定量。此外,还训练了不同的机器学习模型,以区分抗体聚集体和EV颗粒,并通过增加双CD9/CD81群体来校正EV定量。使用流式纳米分析仪时,采用不同的稀释或分级方法制备EV样品,提高了CD9/CD81 EV群体的检测率。比较两种仪器测量的EV表型百分比,在校正百分比后,双阳性和单阳性颗粒存在差异,这可能是由于每种仪器的检测限不同。我们的研究表明,取决于抗体标记后使用的EV样品制备方法,NanoImager和流式纳米分析仪这两个平台在四跨膜蛋白阳性的单个EV表征方面存在差异。此外,我们应用机器学习模型,通过拟合尺寸分布数据来校正基于成像结果中识别出的假阳性颗粒。