Back

Isolation of Extracellular Vesicles from Minimal Volume Ascites Fluid Using Strong Anion Exchange Magnetic Beads

Cooper, T. T.; Veliz, L.; Afzali, F.; Djoumessi, C.; Hovey, O. F. J.; Myette, R. L.; Johnston, T. P.; Wells, C.; Robertson, T.; Burger, D.; Abraham, S. A.; Shepherd, T. G.; Craig, A.; Lagugne-Labarthet, F.; Lajoie, G. A.; Postovit, L.-M.

2026-06-09 biochemistry
10.1101/2025.09.24.678291 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Ovarian cancer (OC) remains a leading cause of gynecologic cancer mortality due to late-stage diagnosis and limited early detection strategies. Ascites fluid, a pathological hallmark of OC, is a rich source of tumor-derived extracellular vesicles (EVs) that reflect the tumor microenvironment and hold promise for biomarker discovery. However, isolating EVs from minimal ascites volumes (<100 {micro}L) poses technical challenges using conventional methods like ultracentrifugation or size-exclusion chromatography (SEC). This study explores the application of strong anion exchange (SAX) magnetic beads (Mag-Net) for efficient EV isolation from as little as 2 {micro}L of ascites fluid from both murine models and a human patient with mucinous borderline tumor. We demonstrate that SAX achieves robust EV capture at 10{micro}l of input volume, enabling comprehensive proteomic profiling and single-EV surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS) with a >2-fold increase in proteomic depth compared to raw ascites. Notably, this study was able to identify 1000 proteins not previously annotated in Vesiclepedia for OC-derived EVs, alongside distinct SERS signatures, highlighting the potential for multiomic analysis. Comparative analysis with UC revealed enhanced proteomic depth obtained with SAX beads, albeit we also observed differential detection of canonical markers (e.g., CD9, CD81) between input volumes of ascites fluid. These findings establish SAX as a scalable, low-input platform for EV-based biomarker discovery, paving the way for improved early detection and molecular insights into OC progression.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Extracellular Biology
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.9%
2
Journal of Extracellular Vesicles
55 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.9%
3
Analytical Chemistry
218 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
8.1%
4
Small Methods
29 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.4%
5
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 28%
5.3%
6
Journal of Proteome Research
234 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
4.2%
7
Advanced Science
286 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.3%
8
Molecular & Cellular Proteomics
158 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.8%
50% of probability mass above
9
Cell Reports Medicine
153 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.7%
10
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 42%
2.5%
11
Nanoscale
42 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.2%
12
Journal of Biological Chemistry
690 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.2%
13
PROTEOMICS
43 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.8%
14
Cell Reports Methods
165 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
15
npj Digital Medicine
118 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
16
iScience
1154 papers in training set
Top 19%
1.5%
17
Small
78 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.4%
18
Science Advances
1243 papers in training set
Top 23%
1.4%
19
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2444 papers in training set
Top 32%
1.4%
20
The Analyst
16 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.2%
21
Communications Biology
993 papers in training set
Top 24%
1.1%
22
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 59%
0.9%
23
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
494 papers in training set
Top 14%
0.9%
24
Clinical Chemistry
22 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.6%
25
ACS Nano
113 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
26
Clinical Proteomics
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.6%
27
Materials Today Bio
20 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.6%
28
Cells
249 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.6%