Comparison of nanoimaging and nanoflow based detection of extracellular vesicles at a single particle resolution

Abstract 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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Shihan Xu, Zhengrong Zhang, Bridgette C. Melvin, Nibedita Basu Ray, Seiko Ikezu, Tsuneya Ikezu
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2024-10-01
Series:Journal of Extracellular Biology
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/jex2.70016
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850201252815699968
author Shihan Xu
Zhengrong Zhang
Bridgette C. Melvin
Nibedita Basu Ray
Seiko Ikezu
Tsuneya Ikezu
author_facet Shihan Xu
Zhengrong Zhang
Bridgette C. Melvin
Nibedita Basu Ray
Seiko Ikezu
Tsuneya Ikezu
author_sort Shihan Xu
collection DOAJ
description Abstract 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.
format Article
id doaj-art-83a56c75aff84a7f9ec0fcfc18b0dbeb
institution OA Journals
issn 2768-2811
language English
publishDate 2024-10-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Journal of Extracellular Biology
spelling doaj-art-83a56c75aff84a7f9ec0fcfc18b0dbeb2025-08-20T02:12:03ZengWileyJournal of Extracellular Biology2768-28112024-10-01310n/an/a10.1002/jex2.70016Comparison of nanoimaging and nanoflow based detection of extracellular vesicles at a single particle resolutionShihan Xu0Zhengrong Zhang1Bridgette C. Melvin2Nibedita Basu Ray3Seiko Ikezu4Tsuneya Ikezu5Department of Neuroscience Mayo Clinic Florida Jacksonville Florida USADepartment of Neuroscience Mayo Clinic Florida Jacksonville Florida USADepartment of Neuroscience Mayo Clinic Florida Jacksonville Florida USADepartment of Neuroscience Mayo Clinic Florida Jacksonville Florida USADepartment of Neuroscience Mayo Clinic Florida Jacksonville Florida USADepartment of Neuroscience Mayo Clinic Florida Jacksonville Florida USAAbstract 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.https://doi.org/10.1002/jex2.70016direct stochastic optical reconstruction microscopyextracellular vesiclemachine learningnanoflow cytometrynanoimaging
spellingShingle Shihan Xu
Zhengrong Zhang
Bridgette C. Melvin
Nibedita Basu Ray
Seiko Ikezu
Tsuneya Ikezu
Comparison of nanoimaging and nanoflow based detection of extracellular vesicles at a single particle resolution
Journal of Extracellular Biology
direct stochastic optical reconstruction microscopy
extracellular vesicle
machine learning
nanoflow cytometry
nanoimaging
title Comparison of nanoimaging and nanoflow based detection of extracellular vesicles at a single particle resolution
title_full Comparison of nanoimaging and nanoflow based detection of extracellular vesicles at a single particle resolution
title_fullStr Comparison of nanoimaging and nanoflow based detection of extracellular vesicles at a single particle resolution
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of nanoimaging and nanoflow based detection of extracellular vesicles at a single particle resolution
title_short Comparison of nanoimaging and nanoflow based detection of extracellular vesicles at a single particle resolution
title_sort comparison of nanoimaging and nanoflow based detection of extracellular vesicles at a single particle resolution
topic direct stochastic optical reconstruction microscopy
extracellular vesicle
machine learning
nanoflow cytometry
nanoimaging
url https://doi.org/10.1002/jex2.70016
work_keys_str_mv AT shihanxu comparisonofnanoimagingandnanoflowbaseddetectionofextracellularvesiclesatasingleparticleresolution
AT zhengrongzhang comparisonofnanoimagingandnanoflowbaseddetectionofextracellularvesiclesatasingleparticleresolution
AT bridgettecmelvin comparisonofnanoimagingandnanoflowbaseddetectionofextracellularvesiclesatasingleparticleresolution
AT nibeditabasuray comparisonofnanoimagingandnanoflowbaseddetectionofextracellularvesiclesatasingleparticleresolution
AT seikoikezu comparisonofnanoimagingandnanoflowbaseddetectionofextracellularvesiclesatasingleparticleresolution
AT tsuneyaikezu comparisonofnanoimagingandnanoflowbaseddetectionofextracellularvesiclesatasingleparticleresolution