Here, we describe a straightforward protocol that enables in vitro assessment of the abundance of fluorescently labeled microRNAs to study the dynamics of microRNA packaging and export into extracellular vesicles (EVs).
Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are important mediators of cellular communication that are secreted by a variety of different cells. These EVs shuttle bioactive molecules, including proteins, lipids, and nucleic acids (DNA, mRNAs, microRNAs, and other noncoding RNAs), from one cell to another, leading to phenotypic consequences in the recipient cells. Of all the various EV cargo, microRNAs (miRNAs) have garnered a great deal of attention for their role in shaping the microenvironment and in educating recipient cells because of their clear dysregulation and abundance in EVs. Additional data indicates that many miRNAs are actively loaded into EVs. Despite this clear evidence, research on the dynamics of export and mechanisms of miRNA sorting is limited. Here, we provide a protocol using flow cytometry analysis of EV-miRNA that can be used to understand the dynamics of EV-miRNA loading and identify the machinery involved in miRNA export. In this protocol, miRNAs predetermined to be enriched in EVs and depleted from donor cells are conjugated to a fluorophore and transfected into the donor cells. The fluorescently tagged miRNAs are then verified for loading into EVs and depletion from cells using qRT-PCR. As both a transfection control and a tool for gating the transfected population of cells, a fluorescently labeled cellular RNA (cell-retained and EV-depleted) is included. Cells transfected with both the EV-miRNA and cell-retained-miRNA are evaluated for fluorescent signals over the course of 72 h. The fluorescence signal intensity specific for the EV-miRNAs diminishes rapidly compared to the cell-retained miRNA. Using this straightforward protocol, one could now assess the dynamics of miRNA loading and identify various factors responsible for loading miRNAs into EVs.
MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are one of the best-characterized subsets of small noncoding RNAs, which are known for their critical role in post-transcriptional gene regulation. The expression and biogenesis of most miRNAs follow a coordinated series of events that begins with transcription of the primary miRNAs (pri-miRNAs) in the nucleus. Following nuclear processing by the microprocessor complex into precursor-miRNAs (pre-miRNAs), the pre-miRNAs are exported to the cytoplasm, where they undergo further processing by the RNase III endonuclease, dicer into 21-23 nucleotide mature miRNA duplexes1. One of the strands of the processed mature miRNA binds to target messenger RNAs (mRNAs), leading to degradation or translational repression of the targets2. Based on the pleiotropic role of miRNAs in simultaneously regulating multiple diverse target mRNAs, it is not surprising that miRNA expression is tightly regulated3. Indeed, inappropriate expression contributes to various disease states, especially in cancer. The aberrant expression of miRNAs not only represents a disease-specific signature but has also emerged as a target for prognostic and therapeutic potential4,5,6. In addition to their intracellular roles, miRNAs also have non-autonomous roles. For example, miRNAs can be selectively packaged into EVs by donor cells and exported to recipient sites where they elicit diverse phenotypic responses in normal and disease physiology7,8,9.
Despite clear evidence that EV-associated miRNAs are functional biomolecules, it is not completely understood how specific subsets of miRNAs are dysregulated in disease states such as cancer and how cellular machinery selects and sorts miRNAs into Evs10,11. Given the potential role of EV-miRNAs in modulating the microenvironment, it is critical to identify the mechanisms involved in the export of select miRNAs to fully elucidate the role of EVs in intercellular communication and disease pathogenesis. Understanding the process of miRNA release into EVs will not only highlight important mediators of miRNA export but can also provide insights into potential therapeutics. To achieve this level of knowledge, tools need to be adapted to faithfully address these new experimental questions. Indeed, studies that evaluate EVs are growing exponentially due to the introduction of new techniques and controls12,13. In relation to evaluating the abundance of exported miRNAs into EVs, next-generation sequencing and quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) have been the current standard tools. While these tools are useful for evaluating the abundance of miRNAs in EVs, there are limitations to their sensitivity and specificity, and using these static approaches for evaluating dynamics is insufficient. Delineating the dynamics of miRNA export into EVs requires a combination of specialized tools. Here, we present a comprehensive protocol using fluorescently conjugated miRNAs, to analyze the dynamics of miRNA release from donor cells and incorporation into EVs. We also discuss the advantages and limitations of the method and provide recommendations for optimal use. The versatile method presented in this paper will be useful to researchers interested in studying miRNA release into EVs and their potential roles in cellular communication and disease.
NOTE: As a prerequisite to using this technique, identification and validation of selectively exported miRNAs is required. Since different cell lines vary based on the miRNA cargo sorted into their EVs, it is recommended that the cell line of interest and associated EVs be evaluated for miRNAs prior to use. Additionally, lipofectamine-based transfection is one of the critical steps in the protocol; predetermining transfection efficiency prior to setting up the experiment is recommended.
1. Growing cells in culture and transfecting cells with fluorophore-conjugated EV-miRNA
2. Harvesting transfected cells at various time points for analysis of fluorescence
3. Flow cytometry analysis of cell-miRNA and EV-miRNA signal in cells
4. Isolating EVs from transfected cells
5. Flow cytometry analysis of cell-miRNA and EV-miRNA signal in EVs
6. Validating the release of miRNAs in EVs through qRT-PCR
Here, we utilize flow cytometry as a powerful tool to investigate the release of miRNA from the cells into EVs. Using this protocol, flow cytometry analysis of cells transfected with cell-miRNA and EV-miRNA revealed a sequential decrease of fluorescence signal corresponding to EV-miRNA, while the signal corresponding to the cell-miRNA was retained in the cells. To ensure that fluorophore conjugation does not interfere with miRNA release into EVs, miR-451a was conjugated to two separate fluorophores (i.e., Alexa fluor 488 and Alexa fluor 750), and cell retention was evaluated. The results indicate minimal variability between the detection of the separate fluorophore signals post-transfection, validating the reliability of this approach (Figure 3A,B).
Because various reasons could explain the loss of fluorescently tagged miR-451a from the cells, including RNA degradation, it was critical to verify that cellular loss coincided with EV abundance. Using flow cytometry, accumulation of miR-451a conjugated to Alexa fluor-488 in EVs was observed in a time-dependent manner, providing evidence of efficient packaging and eventual release of the miRNA into EVs. In contrast, the fluorescence signal corresponding to the cell retained miRNA, cel-miR-67 was not detected in the EVs (Figure 4). These findings using this new approach were validated using qRT-PCR, which revealed a significantly higher EV/cell expression ratio for miR-150, an additional EV-miRNA, when compared to the cell-miRNA, cel-miR-67 (Figure 5).
Figure 1: Set up of flow cytometer parameters for detection of signals in cells. (A) For the analysis of cell fluorescence, using the software, the highlighted voltages were set up for the parameters indicated. The instrument was set up to record 10,000 cells per sample. The Inspector View confirms the parameters set up for detection and analysis. (B) For the analysis of cell fluorescence, the Threshold for the FSC parameter was set at 5,000 under the cytometer settings tab of the software. The top right panel shows the laser settings for the data capture. The bottom panels show an active global worksheet during the progress of the detection of cells. The samples were run at a medium flow and captured while establishing FSC-A and SSC-A as x-axis and y-axis parameters, respectively. The gating was set using a drawing polygon tool around the population of interest. The gating might be different for another cell line of interest depending upon the diversity of the cell population. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 2: Set up of flow cytometry parameters for signal detection in EVs. (A) For the detection and downstream analysis of EVs, the acquisition volume was set at 95 µL with the flow speed set at 12.5 µL/min. The chosen threshold for EV detection was 0.3 x1000 under the instrument settings tab of the software based upon the calibration beads used. Voltages for FSC, SSC, BL1, and YL1 were 370, 370, 400 and 400, respectively. (B) Setup of gating for capturing heterogenous EV population and distinguishing EVs from the background noise of the instrument. A blank PBS sample (top) was used as a negative control to resolve background noise from the EV population. EV sample (bottom) shows that the population of interest is only 1.8% of the total population because the sample is heterogeneous with overlapping particles in the size range. However, stringent gating was chosen to ensure the detection of the EV population of interest. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 3: Signal detection in cells through flow cytometry. (A) Fluorescence corresponding to EV-miRNA and cell-miRNA was detected in cells at times indicated between 7 h and 72 h following transfection. The signal corresponding to EV-miR-451a (Alexa fluor-488) diminished with time in comparison to the signal from the cell-retained-miRNA, cel-miR-67. (B) Fluorescence corresponding to EV-miR-451a labeled with Alexa fluor-750 showed the same trend as the Alexa Fluro-488 labeled miR-451a, indicating that the fluorophore does not impact the retention of miRNAs by the cells. Overall, the representative results indicate that the transfected miRNA behaves similarly to the endogenous miRNA based on the export of the miRNA into EVs. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 4: Signal detection in EVs through flow cytometry. Fluorescence corresponding to EV-miR-451a and cell-cel-miR-67 was detected in EVs 24 h and 48 h post-transfection. The signal corresponding to EV-miR-451a (Alexa fluor-488) was captured in EVs 48 h following transfection. In contrast, the signal for cel-miR-67 was not detected in EVs. A blank PBS sample was used to set up the gating for this experiment, as shown in Figure 2B. EV samples isolated from cells transfected with non-fluorescent scrambled RNA were used as a negative control. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 5: Quantification of EV-miRNA and cell-miRNA in cells and EVs using qRT-PCR. Calu6 cells were transfected with 2 nM of miR-150 and cel-miR-67 each. EVs were collected 48 h after transfection. EV enrichment was calculated as the ratio of EV expression divided by cellular expression in transfected Calu6 cells for miR-150 and cel-miR-67. Based upon RNA sequencing results comparing the expression of miRNAs in Calu6 cells and their corresponding EVs, miR-30c was used as an endogenous control and a normalizer for fold change computation. The data presented are from one biological replicate, with each data point presenting triplicate qRT-PCR reactions. Data are expressed as mean ± SD, and p-values were computed using an unpaired t-test with Welch's correction (**p < 0.01). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Strengths | Weaknesses |
Allows for simultaneous assessment of selective export of multiple miRNAs in cells and respective EVs | Require additional procedures to differentiate between active and passive export phenomenon |
Assessment of crude heterogenous population is possible and does not require prior separation of EV populations. Can be used to analyze different types of EVs NOTE: Threshold for detection of different types of particles will vary |
Low sensitivity does not allow for detection of limited concentrations of miRNAs in cells or EVs. This can be overcome by incorporating downstream qRT-PCR analysis following RNA isolation from EVs |
Requires a short amount of time for set up and analysis in comparison to standard methods used for miRNA quantification | Lack of standardization protocols for different types of equipment, cell-lines, and various fluorophores. |
Table 1: The major strengths and weaknesses of the protocol.
The newly established protocol enables capturing kinetics of miRNA release into EVs post-transfection of EV-miRNAs. The approach allows simultaneous analysis of multiple EV-miRNAs and cell-miRNAs, subject to the capabilities of the cytometer. Moreover, while flow cytometry analysis can provide valuable insights into EV miRNA biology, it is not without limitations. Albeit some of the limitations can be overcome when used in conjunction with other techniques for a more comprehensive understanding.
An emerging area of interest in EV biology is comprehending the selective export of miRNAs into EVs15,16. While this protocol offers a powerful tool to allow studying selective export of miRNA, one of the critical challenges is distinguishing between active and passive export. Caution must be exercised since overexpressing a miRNA at a high enough concentration could alter the export of miRNA, potentially resulting in inappropriate passive loading. Therefore, experimentation to determine the optimal transfection concentrations of miRNAs is crucial while studying selective export.
Moreover, the protocol, when combined with complementary techniques such as nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA), enables the researcher to assess the EV particle count while also evaluating the miRNA release and has the potential to enable distinguishing between alterations in EV biogenesis pathways and miRNA export mechanisms. This is especially important due to the overlapping mediators of these processes17. Considering that miRNAs can impact various phenotypes, including some involved in EV biogenesis, it would be prudent to evaluate the particle count following transfection of miRNAs18. To overcome this hurdle, another option would be to incorporate an EV-miRNA that remains unaltered under the experimental conditions, thereby ruling out factors involved in EV biogenesis while highlighting the pathways involved in EV-miRNA export.
Several studies have quantified miRNAs using qRT-PCR, a standard method for endogenous miRNA quantification10,11,16. However, it lacks the capability to dynamically capture the release of miRNAs into EVs. When comparing flow cytometry to qRT-PCR, they differ greatly based on the assay sensitivity and design. While qRT-PCR is a highly sensitive technique and theoretically capable of quantifying minimal miRNA copy counts, distinguishing two samples requires at least a 2-fold (100%) difference in the copy number of miRNAs of interest. Flow cytometry, on the other hand, captures signal-based differences based on the abundance of fluorescently labeled miRNA and can differentiate small percentage changes in signals. Nonetheless, its low sensitivity restricts the detection of miRNAs with limited copy numbers. The two techniques synergistically complement each other when used in conjunction, as indicated in the protocol.
In summary, this protocol offers a valuable tool to investigate selective miRNA export dynamics. Despite the aforementioned challenges, the strength of this protocol lies in its ability to analyze multiple miRNAs simultaneously, contributing to a better understanding of miRNA biology, their export, and their role in EV biology. The major strengths and weaknesses of the protocol that need to be considered are listed in Table 1.
The authors have nothing to disclose.
We acknowledge support and advice from Dr. Jill Hutchcroft, Director of the Flow Cytometry Core Facility at Purdue University. This work was supported by R01CA226259 and R01CA205420 to A.L.K., an American Lung Association Innovation Award (ANALA2023) IA-1059916 to A.L.K., a Purdue Shared resource facility grant P30CA023168, and a flagship Fulbright Doctoral Scholarship awarded by the Department of the State, USA to H.H.
1.5 mL microcentrifuge tubes | Fisher | 05-408-129 | |
15 mL Falcon tubes | Corning | 352097 | |
6-well clear flat bottom surface treated tissue culture plates | Fisher Scientific | FB012927 | |
ApogeeMix 25 mL, (PS80/110/500 & Si180/240/300/590/880/1300 nm) | Apogee Flow Systems | 1527 | To set up gating and parameters for particle detection |
Attune Nxt Flow Cytometer | ThermoFisher Scientific | N/A | For fluorescence analysis in EVs |
BD Fortessa Cell Analyzer | BD Biosciences | N/A | For fluorescence analysis in cells |
Cell culture incubator | N/A | N/A | Maintaining temperature of 37 °C and 5% CO2 |
Cell Culture medium | N/A | N/A | specific for the cell-line of interest |
Cell line of interest | N/A | N/A | Any cell line tested and evaluated for EV and cellular abundance of miRNAs on interest. |
Cell-miRNA (miRIDIAN microRNA Mimic Red Transfection Control) | Horizon discovery | CP-004500-01-05 | miRNAs predetermined to be retained by the cell-line of interest and not selectively exported out into EVs |
EV-miRNA (Fluorophore conjugated miRNAs) | Integrated DNA Technologies (IDT) | miRNAs predetermined to be selectively sorted into EVs | |
Fluorescence microscope | N/A | N/A | |
Gibco Opti-MEM Reduced Serum Medium | Fisher Scientific | 31-985-070 | |
Hausser Scientific Hemocytometer | Fisher | 02-671-54 | |
Hyclone 1x PBS (for cell culture) | Fisher | SH30256FS | |
Lipofectamine RNAimax | Fisher Scientific | 13-778-150 | |
miRCURY LNA Reverse Transcriptase | Qiagen | 339340 | |
miRCURY LNA SYBR Green PCR | Qiagen | 339347 | |
mirVana RNA Isolation | Qiagen | AM1561 | |
Nuclease free water | Fisher Scientific | 4387936 | |
Paraformaldehyde, 4% in PBS | Fisher | AAJ61899AK | |
Reagent reservoir nonsterile | VWR | 89094-684 | |
Thermo ABI QuantiStudio DX Real-Time PCR | ThermoFisher Scientific | N/A | |
Trypsin 0.25% | Fisher | SH3004201 | |
Ultracentrifuge | N/A | N/A |