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.

Extracellular vesicles (EVs) have emerged as important mediators of intercellular communication in a diverse range of biological processes. For future therapeutic applications and for EV biology research in general, understanding the in vivo fate of EVs is of utmost importance. Here we studied biodistribution of EVs in mice after systemic delivery. EVs were isolated from 3 different mouse cell sources, including dendritic cells (DCs) derived from bone marrow, and labelled with a near-infrared lipophilic dye. Xenotransplantation of EVs was further carried out for cross-species comparison. The reliability of the labelling technique was confirmed by sucrose gradient fractionation, organ perfusion and further supported by immunohistochemical staining using CD63-EGFP probed vesicles. While vesicles accumulated mainly in liver, spleen, gastrointestinal tract and lungs, differences related to EV cell origin were detected. EVs accumulated in the tumour tissue of tumour-bearing mice and, after introduction of the rabies virus glycoprotein-targeting moiety, they were found more readily in acetylcholine-receptor-rich organs. In addition, the route of administration and the dose of injected EVs influenced the biodistribution pattern. This is the first extensive biodistribution investigation of EVs comparing the impact of several different variables, the results of which have implications for the design and feasibility of therapeutic studies using EVs.

Extracellular vesicles (EVs), such as exosomes and microvesicles, are released by different cell types and participate in physiological and pathophysiological processes. EVs mediate intercellular communication as cell-derived extracellular signalling organelles that transmit specific information from their cell of origin to their target cells. As a result of these properties, EVs of defined cell types may serve as novel tools for various therapeutic approaches, including (a) anti-tumour therapy, (b) pathogen vaccination, (c) immune-modulatory and regenerative therapies and (d) drug delivery. The translation of EVs into clinical therapies requires the categorization of EV-based therapeutics in compliance with existing regulatory frameworks. As the classification defines subsequent requirements for manufacturing, quality control and clinical investigation, it is of major importance to define whether EVs are considered the active drug components or primarily serve as drug delivery vehicles. For an effective and particularly safe translation of EV-based therapies into clinical practice, a high level of cooperation between researchers, clinicians and competent authorities is essential. In this position statement, basic and clinical scientists, as members of the International Society for Extracellular Vesicles (ISEV) and of the European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) program of the European Union, namely European Network on Microvesicles and Exosomes in Health and Disease (ME-HaD), summarize recent developments and the current knowledge of EV-based therapies. Aspects of safety and regulatory requirements that must be considered for pharmaceutical manufacturing and clinical application are highlighted. Production and quality control processes are discussed. Strategies to promote the therapeutic application of EVs in future clinical studies are addressed.

Cells release nano-sized membrane vesicles that are involved in intercellular communication by transferring biological information between cells. It is generally accepted that cells release at least three types of extracellular vesicles (EVs): apoptotic bodies, microvesicles and exosomes. While a wide range of putative biological functions have been attributed to exosomes, they are assumed to represent a homogenous population of EVs. We hypothesized the existence of subpopulations of exosomes with defined molecular compositions and biological properties. Density gradient centrifugation of isolated exosomes revealed the presence of two distinct subpopulations, differing in biophysical properties and their proteomic and RNA repertoires. Interestingly, the subpopulations mediated differential effects on the gene expression programmes in recipient cells. In conclusion, we demonstrate that cells release distinct exosome subpopulations with unique compositions that elicit differential effects on recipient cells. Further dissection of exosome heterogeneity will advance our understanding of exosomal biology in health and disease and accelerate the development of exosome-based diagnostics and therapeutics.

No abstract

Cells release membrane enclosed nano-sized vesicles termed extracellular vesicles (EVs) that function as mediators of intercellular communication by transferring biological information between cells. Tumor-derived EVs have emerged as important mediators in cancer development and progression, mainly through transfer of their bioactive content which can include oncoproteins, oncogenes, chemokine receptors, as well as soluble factors, transcripts of proteins and miRNAs involved in angiogenesis or inflammation. This transfer has been shown to influence the metastatic behavior of primary tumors. Moreover, tumor-derived EVs have been shown to influence distant cellular niches, establishing favorable microenvironments that support growth of disseminated cancer cells upon their arrival at these pre-metastatic niches. It is generally accepted that cells release a number of major EV populations with distinct biophysical properties and biological functions. Exosomes, microvesicles, and apoptotic bodies are EV populations most widely studied and characterized. They are discriminated based primarily on their intracellular origin. However, increasing evidence suggests that even within these EV populations various subpopulations may exist. This heterogeneity introduces an extra level of complexity in the study of EV biology and function. For example, EV subpopulations could have unique roles in the intricate biological processes underlying cancer biology. Here, we discuss current knowledge regarding the role of subpopulations of EVs in cancer development and progression and highlight the relevance of EV heterogeneity. The position of tetraspanins and integrins therein will be highlighted. Since addressing EV heterogeneity has become essential for the EV field, current and novel techniques for isolating EV subpopulations will also be discussed. Further dissection of EV heterogeneity will advance our understanding of the critical roles of EVs in health and disease.

To evaluate our diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines, clinical and long-term follow-up data of 219 patients with primary or secondary cutaneous CD30+ lymphoproliferative disorders were evaluated. The study group included 118 patients with lymphomatoid papulosis (LyP; group 1), 79 patients with primary cutaneous CD30+ large T-cell lymphoma (LTCL; group 2), 11 patients with CD30+ LTCL and skin and regional lymph node involvement (group 3), and 11 patients with secondary cutaneous CD30+ LTCL (group 4). Patients with LyP often did not receive any specific treatment, whereas most patients with primary cutaneous CD30+ LTCL were treated with radiotherapy or excision. All patients with skin-limited disease from groups 1 and 2 who were treated with multiagent chemotherapy had 1 or more skin relapses. The calculated risk for systemic disease within 10 years of diagnosis was 4% for group 1, 16% for group 2, and 20% for group 3 (after initial therapy). Disease-related 5-year-survival rates were 100% (group 1), 96% (group 2), 91% (group 3), and 24% (group 4), respectively. The results confirm the favorable prognoses of these primary cutaneous CD30+ lymphoproliferative disorders and underscore that LyP and primary cutaneous CD30+ lymphomas are closely related conditions. They also indicate that CD30+ LTCL on the skin and in 1 draining lymph node station has a good prognosis similar to that for primary cutaneous CD30+ LTCL without concurrent lymph node involvement. Multiagent chemotherapy is only indicated for patients with full-blown or developing extracutaneous disease; it is never or rarely indicated for patients with skin-limited CD30+ lymphomas.

No abstract