Biological membranes in EV biogenesis, stability, uptake, and cargo transfer: an ISEV position paper arising from the ISEV membranes and EVs workshop

Paracrine and endocrine roles have increasingly been ascribed to extracellular vesicles (EVs) generated by multicellular organisms. Central to the biogenesis, content, and function of EVs are their delimiting lipid bilayer membranes. To evaluate research progress on membranes and EVs, the International Society for Extracellular Vesicles (ISEV) conducted a workshop in March 2018 in Baltimore, Maryland, USA, bringing together key opinion leaders and hands-on researchers who were selected on the basis of submitted applications. The workshop was accompanied by two scientific surveys and covered four broad topics: EV biogenesis and release; EV uptake and fusion; technologies and strategies used to study EV membranes; and EV transfer and functional assays. In this ISEV position paper, we synthesize the results of the workshop and the related surveys to outline important outstanding questions about EV membranes and describe areas of consensus. The workshop discussions and survey responses reveal that while much progress has been made in the field, there are still several concepts that divide opinion. Good consensus exists in some areas, including particular aspects of EV biogenesis, uptake and downstream signalling. Areas with little to no consensus include EV storage and stability, as well as whether and how EVs fuse with target cells. Further research is needed in these key areas, as a better understanding of membrane biology will contribute substantially towards advancing the field of extracellular vesicles.Fil: Russell, Ashley E.. University Johns Hopkins; Estados UnidosFil: Sneider, Alexandra. University Johns Hopkins; Estados UnidosFil: Witwer, Kenneth W.. University Johns Hopkins; Estados UnidosFil: Bergese, Paolo. Università Degli Studi Di Brescia; ItaliaFil: Bhattacharyya, Suvendra N.. Indian Institute of Chemical Biology; IndiaFil: Cocks, Alexander. Cardiff University; Reino UnidoFil: Cocucci, Emanuele. Ohio State University; Estados UnidosFil: Erdbrügger, Uta. University of Virginia; Estados UnidosFil: Falcon Perez, Juan M.. Ikerbasque Basque Foundation for Science; EspañaFil: Freeman, David W.. National Institute On Aging National Institute for Helth ; Estados UnidosFil: Gallagher, Thomas M.. Loyola University Of Chicago; Estados UnidosFil: Hu, Shuaishuai. Technological University Dublin; IrlandaFil: Huang, Yiyao. University Johns Hopkins; Estados Unidos. Southern Medical University; ChinaFil: Jay, Steven M.. University of Maryland; Estados UnidosFil: Kano, Shin-ichi. The University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Medicine; Estados UnidosFil: Lavieu, Gregory. Institut Curie; FranciaFil: Leszczynska, Aleksandra. University of California at San Diego; Estados UnidosFil: Llorente, Alicia M.. Oslo University Hospital; NoruegaFil: Lu, Quan. Harvard University. Harvard School of Public Health; Estados UnidosFil: Mahairaki, Vasiliki. University Johns Hopkins; Estados UnidosFil: Muth, Dillon C.. University Johns Hopkins; Estados UnidosFil: Noren Hooten, Nicole. National Institute On Aging National Institute for Helth ; Estados UnidosFil: Ostrowski, Matias. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Houssay. Instituto de Investigaciones Biomédicas en Retrovirus y Sida. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Medicina. Instituto de Investigaciones Biomédicas en Retrovirus y Sida; ArgentinaFil: Prada, Ilaria. Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche; ItaliaFil: Sahoo, Susmita. Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai ; Estados UnidosFil: Schøyen, Tine Hiorth. Uit The Arctic University Of Norway; Noruega. University Johns Hopkins; Estados UnidosFil: Sheng, Lifuy. University of Washington. School of Medicine; Estados UnidosFil: Tesch, Deanna. Shaw University; Estados UnidosFil: Van Niel, Guillaume. No especifíca;Fil: Vandenbroucke, Roosmarijn E.. University of Ghent; BélgicaFil: Verweij, Frederik J.. No especifíca;Fil: Villar, Ana V.. Universidad de Cantabria; EspañaFil: Wauben, Marca. University of Utrecht; Países BajosFil: Wehman, Ann M.. Universität Würzburg; AlemaniaFil: Ardavan, Arzhang. Peking University; ; ChinaFil: Carter, David Raul Francisco. Oxford Brookes University; Reino UnidoFil: Vader, Pieter. University Medical Center Utrecht; Países Bajo

Minimal information for studies of extracellular vesicles 2018 (MISEV2018):a position statement of the International Society for Extracellular Vesicles and update of the MISEV2014 guidelines

The last decade has seen a sharp increase in the number of scientific publications describing physiological and pathological functions of extracellular vesicles (EVs), a collective term covering various subtypes of cell-released, membranous structures, called exosomes, microvesicles, microparticles, ectosomes, oncosomes, apoptotic bodies, and many other names. However, specific issues arise when working with these entities, whose size and amount often make them difficult to obtain as relatively pure preparations, and to characterize properly. The International Society for Extracellular Vesicles (ISEV) proposed Minimal Information for Studies of Extracellular Vesicles (“MISEV”) guidelines for the field in 2014. We now update these “MISEV2014” guidelines based on evolution of the collective knowledge in the last four years. An important point to consider is that ascribing a specific function to EVs in general, or to subtypes of EVs, requires reporting of specific information beyond mere description of function in a crude, potentially contaminated, and heterogeneous preparation. For example, claims that exosomes are endowed with exquisite and specific activities remain difficult to support experimentally, given our still limited knowledge of their specific molecular machineries of biogenesis and release, as compared with other biophysically similar EVs. The MISEV2018 guidelines include tables and outlines of suggested protocols and steps to follow to document specific EV-associated functional activities. Finally, a checklist is provided with summaries of key points

Stem cell function is conserved during shortterm storage of cultured epidermal cell sheets at 12°C

Transplantation of cultured epidermal cell sheets (CES) can be life-saving for patients with large area burns. CES have also been successfully used to regenerate eye and urethral epithelia in animal models. Short-term storage aims to extend the transplantation window, offers flexibility in timing surgery and allows testing of CES quality, phenotype and sterility. This study investigated extended CES storage and explored the effect of additional re-incubation recovery time following storage. The proliferative quality of stored confluent versus pre-confluent CES was also investigated using functional testing. CES were stored at 12°C and results compared to non-stored control CES. Investigation of timepoints during 15 days storage revealed that viability began to deteriorate by day 11 and was associated with increased lactate in the storage medium. The percentage of apoptotic cells also significantly increased by day 11. Flow cytometry analysis of integrin β1 expression and cell size indicated best retention of stem cells at 7 days of storage. Functional testing of pre-confluent and confluent cells following 7 days storage showed that pre-confluent cells responded well to 1-day re-incubation after storage; they became highly prolific, increasing in number by ~67%. Conversely, proliferation in stored confluent cells declined by ~50% with 1-day re-incubation. Pre-confluent stored CES also had far superior stem cell colony forming efficiency (CFE) performance compared to the confluent group. Re-incubation improved CFE in both groups, but the pre-confluent group again out-performed the confluent group with significantly more colonies. In conclusion, a maximum storage period of 7 days is recommended. Use of pre-confluent cells and one day recovery incubation greatly improves viability, colony-forming ability and proliferation of cells stored for 7 days at 12°C. Thus, these recommendations should be considered under culture and storage of high-quality CES for clinical use

Stem cell function is conserved during shortterm storage of cultured epidermal cell sheets at 12°C

Transplantation of cultured epidermal cell sheets (CES) can be life-saving for patients with large area burns. CES have also been successfully used to regenerate eye and urethral epithelia in animal models. Short-term storage aims to extend the transplantation window, offers flexibility in timing surgery and allows testing of CES quality, phenotype and sterility. This study investigated extended CES storage and explored the effect of additional re-incubation recovery time following storage. The proliferative quality of stored confluent versus pre-confluent CES was also investigated using functional testing. CES were stored at 12˚C and results compared to non-stored control CES. Investigation of timepoints during 15 days storage revealed that viability began to deteriorate by day 11 and was associated with increased lactate in the storage medium. The percentage of apoptotic cells also significantly increased by day 11. Flow cytometry analysis of integrinβ1 expression and cell size indicated best retention of stem cells at 7 days of storage. Functional testing of pre-confluent and confluent cells following 7 days storage showed that pre-confluent cells responded well to 1-day re-incubation after storage; they became highly prolific, increasing in number by ~67%. Conversely, proliferation in stored confluent cells declined by ~50% with 1-day reincubation. Pre-confluent stored CES also had far superior stem cell colony forming efficiency (CFE) performance compared to the confluent group. Re-incubation improved CFE in both groups, but the pre-confluent group again out-performed the confluent group with significantly more colonies. In conclusion, a maximum storage period of 7 days is recommended. Use of pre-confluent cells and one day recovery incubation greatly improves viability, colony-forming ability and proliferation of cells stored for 7 days at 12˚C. Thus, these recommendations should be considered under culture and storage of high-quality CES for clinical use

Stem cell function is conserved during shortterm storage of cultured epidermal cell sheets at 12˚C

Transplantation of cultured epidermal cell sheets (CES) can be life-saving for patients with large area burns. CES have also been successfully used to regenerate eye and urethral epithelia in animal models. Short-term storage aims to extend the transplantation window, offers flexibility in timing surgery and allows testing of CES quality, phenotype and sterility. This study investigated extended CES storage and explored the effect of additional re-incubation recovery time following storage. The proliferative quality of stored confluent versus pre-confluent CES was also investigated using functional testing. CES were stored at 12°C and results compared to non-stored control CES. Investigation of timepoints during 15 days storage revealed that viability began to deteriorate by day 11 and was associated with increased lactate in the storage medium. The percentage of apoptotic cells also significantly increased by day 11. Flow cytometry analysis of integrin β1 expression and cell size indicated best retention of stem cells at 7 days of storage. Functional testing of pre-confluent and confluent cells following 7 days storage showed that pre-confluent cells responded well to 1-day re-incubation after storage; they became highly prolific, increasing in number by ~67%. Conversely, proliferation in stored confluent cells declined by ~50% with 1-day re-incubation. Pre-confluent stored CES also had far superior stem cell colony forming efficiency (CFE) performance compared to the confluent group. Re-incubation improved CFE in both groups, but the pre-confluent group again out-performed the confluent group with significantly more colonies. In conclusion, a maximum storage period of 7 days is recommended. Use of pre-confluent cells and one day recovery incubation greatly improves viability, colony-forming ability and proliferation of cells stored for 7 days at 12°C. Thus, these recommendations should be considered under culture and storage of high-quality CES for clinical use

Minimal information for studies of extracellular vesicles 2018 (MISEV2018): a position statement of the International Society for Extracellular Vesicles and update of the MISEV2014 guidelines

The last decade has seen a sharp increase in the number of scientific publications describing physiological and pathological functions of extracellular vesicles (EVs), a collective term covering various subtypes of cell-released, membranous structures, called exosomes, microvesicles, microparticles, ectosomes, oncosomes, apoptotic bodies, and many other names. However, specific issues arise when working with these entities, whose size and amount often make them difficult to obtain as relatively pure preparations, and to characterize properly. The International Society for Extracellular Vesicles (ISEV) proposed Minimal Information for Studies of Extracellular Vesicles ("MISEV") guidelines for the field in 2014. We now update these "MISEV2014" guidelines based on evolution of the collective knowledge in the last four years. An important point to consider is that ascribing a specific function to EVs in general, or to subtypes of EVs, requires reporting of specific information beyond mere description of function in a crude, potentially contaminated, and heterogeneous preparation. For example, claims that exosomes are endowed with exquisite and specific activities remain difficult to support experimentally, given our still limited knowledge of their specific molecular machineries of biogenesis and release, as compared with other biophysically similar EVs. The MISEV2018 guidelines include tables and outlines of suggested protocols and steps to follow to document specific EV-associated functional activities. Finally, a checklist is provided with summaries of key points