True volumetric counting of CD34+ cells using flow cytometry

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q4 BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS Journal of immunological methods Pub Date : 2024-02-21 DOI:10.1016/j.jim.2024.113649
Laura G. Rico , Jorge Bardina , Roser Salvia , Michael D. Ward , Jolene A. Bradford , Jordi Petriz
{"title":"True volumetric counting of CD34+ cells using flow cytometry","authors":"Laura G. Rico ,&nbsp;Jorge Bardina ,&nbsp;Roser Salvia ,&nbsp;Michael D. Ward ,&nbsp;Jolene A. Bradford ,&nbsp;Jordi Petriz","doi":"10.1016/j.jim.2024.113649","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>While the single-platform flow cytometric CD34+ cell counting method is the preferred choice to predict the yield of mobilized peripheral blood stem cells, most flow cytometers lack the ability of hematology counter analyzers to perform volumetric counting. However, one of the problems using reference microbeads is the vanishing counting bead phenomenon. This phenomenon results in a drop in microbeads concentration and reduces the total and relative number of beads in calibration procedures. In the last years, flow cytometers including a volumetric system to quantify cells have been developed and may represent a promising alternative to enumerate CD34+ cells avoiding the use of beads.</p><p>In this study we have used a direct true volumetric counting of CD34+ cells under continuous flow pump to overcome potential drawbacks with impact in rare cell analysis. To confirm this hypothesis, we have compared the results of CD34+ cell enumeration using non-volumetric vs. volumetric systems with FC500 (Beckman Coulter) and Attune NxT (ThermoFisher) flow cytometers, respectively, in mobilized peripheral blood samples.</p><p>No statistically significant differences were observed between measurements of CD34+ cells using beads, when the FC500 and Attune NxT absolute counting values were compared, or when CD34+ counts were compared on the Attune NxT, either using or not using beads. Linear regressions to study the relationship between volumetric and non-volumetric CD34+ counts confirmed the accuracy of each method. Bland-Altman test showed agreement between both methods.</p><p>Our data showed that CD34+ cell enumeration using a volumetric system is comparable with current counting systems. This method represents an alternative with the advantage of the simplification of sample preparation and the reduction of the analysis subjectivity.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16000,"journal":{"name":"Journal of immunological methods","volume":"527 ","pages":"Article 113649"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of immunological methods","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022175924000346","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While the single-platform flow cytometric CD34+ cell counting method is the preferred choice to predict the yield of mobilized peripheral blood stem cells, most flow cytometers lack the ability of hematology counter analyzers to perform volumetric counting. However, one of the problems using reference microbeads is the vanishing counting bead phenomenon. This phenomenon results in a drop in microbeads concentration and reduces the total and relative number of beads in calibration procedures. In the last years, flow cytometers including a volumetric system to quantify cells have been developed and may represent a promising alternative to enumerate CD34+ cells avoiding the use of beads.

In this study we have used a direct true volumetric counting of CD34+ cells under continuous flow pump to overcome potential drawbacks with impact in rare cell analysis. To confirm this hypothesis, we have compared the results of CD34+ cell enumeration using non-volumetric vs. volumetric systems with FC500 (Beckman Coulter) and Attune NxT (ThermoFisher) flow cytometers, respectively, in mobilized peripheral blood samples.

No statistically significant differences were observed between measurements of CD34+ cells using beads, when the FC500 and Attune NxT absolute counting values were compared, or when CD34+ counts were compared on the Attune NxT, either using or not using beads. Linear regressions to study the relationship between volumetric and non-volumetric CD34+ counts confirmed the accuracy of each method. Bland-Altman test showed agreement between both methods.

Our data showed that CD34+ cell enumeration using a volumetric system is comparable with current counting systems. This method represents an alternative with the advantage of the simplification of sample preparation and the reduction of the analysis subjectivity.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用流式细胞仪对 CD34+ 细胞进行真正的体积计数
虽然单平台流式细胞仪 CD34+ 细胞计数法是预测动员外周血干细胞产量的首选方法,但大多数流式细胞仪缺乏血液计数器分析仪进行体积计数的能力。然而,使用参考微珠的问题之一是计数珠消失现象。这种现象会导致微珠浓度下降,减少校准程序中微珠的总数量和相对数量。在过去几年中,包括体积计数系统的流式细胞仪得到了发展,这可能是避免使用微珠来计数 CD34+ 细胞的一种有前途的替代方法。为了证实这一假设,我们比较了在动员外周血样本中分别使用 FC500(Beckman Coulter)和 Attune NxT(ThermoFisher)流式细胞仪的非体积计数系统和体积计数系统进行 CD34+ 细胞计数的结果。在比较 FC500 和 Attune NxT 的绝对计数值时,或在比较 Attune NxT 的 CD34+ 计数时,使用或不使用珠子,在使用珠子进行的 CD34+ 细胞测量之间没有观察到显著的统计学差异。研究体积和非体积 CD34+ 计数之间关系的线性回归证实了每种方法的准确性。我们的数据显示,使用容积系统进行 CD34+ 细胞计数与目前的计数系统不相上下。这种方法是一种替代方法,其优点是简化了样本制备,减少了分析的主观性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
120
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Immunological Methods is devoted to covering techniques for: (1) Quantitating and detecting antibodies and/or antigens. (2) Purifying immunoglobulins, lymphokines and other molecules of the immune system. (3) Isolating antigens and other substances important in immunological processes. (4) Labelling antigens and antibodies. (5) Localizing antigens and/or antibodies in tissues and cells. (6) Detecting, and fractionating immunocompetent cells. (7) Assaying for cellular immunity. (8) Documenting cell-cell interactions. (9) Initiating immunity and unresponsiveness. (10) Transplanting tissues. (11) Studying items closely related to immunity such as complement, reticuloendothelial system and others. (12) Molecular techniques for studying immune cells and their receptors. (13) Imaging of the immune system. (14) Methods for production or their fragments in eukaryotic and prokaryotic cells. In addition the journal will publish articles on novel methods for analysing the organization, structure and expression of genes for immunologically important molecules such as immunoglobulins, T cell receptors and accessory molecules involved in antigen recognition, processing and presentation. Submitted full length manuscripts should describe new methods of broad applicability to immunology and not simply the application of an established method to a particular substance - although papers describing such applications may be considered for publication as a short Technical Note. Review articles will also be published by the Journal of Immunological Methods. In general these manuscripts are by solicitation however anyone interested in submitting a review can contact the Reviews Editor and provide an outline of the proposed review.
期刊最新文献
Isolation of anti-Ancylostoma-secreted protein 5 (ASP5) antibody from a naïve antibody phage library. Inducing and regulating human naive CD4+ t cell proliferation by different antigen presenting cells. Workflow improvement and financial gain after integration of high-throughput sample processing system with flow cytometer in a high-volume pathology laboratory: Results from a prospective comparative study using Lean principles Development of an ELISA for an effective potency determination of recombinant rabies human monoclonal antibody A note of caution for using calmodulin antibodies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1