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) are intercellular communicators with key functions in physiological and pathological processes and have recently garnered interest because of their diagnostic and therapeutic potential. The past decade has brought about the development and commercialization of a wide array of methods to isolate EVs from serum. Which subpopulations of EVs are captured strongly depends on the isolation method, which in turn determines how suitable resulting samples are for various downstream applications. To help clinicians and scientists choose the most appropriate approach for their experiments, isolation methods need to be comparatively characterized. Few attempts have been made to comprehensively analyse vesicular microRNAs (miRNAs) in patient biofluids for biomarker studies. To address this discrepancy, we set out to benchmark the performance of several isolation principles for serum EVs in healthy individuals and critically ill patients. Here, we compared five different methods of EV isolation in combination with two RNA extraction methods regarding their suitability for biomarker discovery‐focused miRNA sequencing as well as biological characteristics of captured vesicles. Our findings reveal striking method‐specific differences in both the properties of isolated vesicles and the ability of associated miRNAs to serve in biomarker research. While isolation by precipitation and membrane affinity was highly suitable for miRNA‐based biomarker discovery, methods based on size‐exclusion chromatography failed to separate patients from healthy volunteers. Isolated vesicles differed in size, quantity, purity and composition, indicating that each method captured distinctive populations of EVs as well as additional contaminants. Even though the focus of this work was on transcriptomic profiling of EV‐miRNAs, our insights also apply to additional areas of research. We provide guidance for navigating the multitude of EV isolation methods available today and help researchers and clinicians make an informed choice about which strategy to use for experiments involving critically ill patients.

Small RNA-Seq has emerged as a powerful tool in transcriptomics, gene expression profiling and biomarker discovery. Sequencing cell-free nucleic acids, particularly microRNA (miRNA), from liquid biopsies additionally provides exciting possibilities for molecular diagnostics, and might help establish disease-specific biomarker signatures. The complexity of the small RNA-Seq workflow, however, bears challenges and biases that researchers need to be aware of in order to generate high-quality data. Rigorous standardization and extensive validation are required to guarantee reliability, reproducibility and comparability of research findings. Hypotheses based on flawed experimental conditions can be inconsistent and even misleading. Comparable to the well-established MIQE guidelines for qPCR experiments, this work aims at establishing guidelines for experimental design and pre-analytical sample processing, standardization of library preparation and sequencing reactions, as well as facilitating data analysis. We highlight bottlenecks in small RNA-Seq experiments, point out the importance of stringent quality control and validation, and provide a primer for differential expression analysis and biomarker discovery. Following our recommendations will encourage better sequencing practice, increase experimental transparency and lead to more reproducible small RNA-Seq results. This will ultimately enhance the validity of biomarker signatures, and allow reliable and robust clinical predictions.

Septic shock is a common medical condition with a mortality approaching 50% where early diagnosis and treatment are of particular importance for patient survival. Novel biomarkers that serve as prompt indicators of sepsis are urgently needed. High‐throughput technologies assessing circulating microRNAs represent an important tool for biomarker identification, but the blood‐compartment specificity of these miRNAs has not yet been investigated. We characterized miRNA profiles from serum exosomes, total serum and blood cells (leukocytes, erythrocytes, platelets) of sepsis patients by next‐generation sequencing and RT‐qPCR (n = 3 × 22) and established differences in miRNA expression between blood compartments. In silico analysis was used to identify compartment‐specific signalling functions of differentially regulated miRNAs in sepsis‐relevant pathways. In septic shock, a total of 77 and 103 miRNAs were down‐ and up‐regulated, respectively. A majority of these regulated miRNAs (14 in serum, 32 in exosomes and 73 in blood cells) had not been previously associated with sepsis. We found a distinctly compartment‐specific regulation of miRNAs between sepsis patients and healthy volunteers. Blood cellular miR‐199b‐5p was identified as a potential early indicator for sepsis and septic shock. miR‐125b‐5p and miR‐26b‐5p were uniquely regulated in exosomes and serum, respectively, while one miRNA (miR‐27b‐3p) was present in all three compartments. The expression of sepsis‐associated miRNAs is compartment‐specific. Exosome‐derived miRNAs contribute significant information regarding sepsis diagnosis and survival prediction and could serve as newly identified targets for the development of novel sepsis biomarkers.