4.2 Article

Increased exosome production from tumour cell cultures using the Integra CELLine culture system

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGICAL METHODS
卷 335, 期 1-2, 页码 98-105

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jim.2008.03.001

关键词

exosomes; tumour; culture; mesothelioma; in vitro

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Exosomes are nanometer-sized vesicles, secreted from most cell types, with documented immune-modulatory functions. Exosomes can be purified from cultured cells but to do so effectively, requires maintenance of cells at high density in order to obtain sufficient accumulation of exosomes in the culture medium, prior to purification. Whilst high density cultures can be achieved with cells in suspension, this remains difficult with adherent cells, resulting in low quantity of exosomes for subsequent study. We have used the Integra CELLine culture system, originally designed for hybridoma cultures, to achieve a significant increase in obtainable exosomes from adherent and non-adherent turnout cells. Traditional cultures of mesothelioma cells (cultured in 75 cm(2) flasks) gave an average yield of 0.78 mu g +/- 0.14 mu g exosome/ml of conditioned medium The CELLine Adhere 1000 (CLAD 1000) flask, housing the same cell line, increased exosome yield approximately 12 fold to 10.06 mu g +/- 0.97 mu g/ml. The morphology, phenotype and immune function of these exosomes were compared, and found to be identical in all respects. Similarly an 8 fold increase in exosome production was obtained from NKL cells (a suspension cell line) using a CELLine 1000 (CL1000) flask. The CELLine system also incurred similar to 5.5 fold less cost and reduced labour for cell maintenance. This simple culture system is a cost effective, useful method for significantly increasing the quantity of exosomes available from cultured cells, without detrimental effects. This tool should prove advantageous in future studies of exosome-immune modulation in cancer and other settings. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据