人CD34+细胞计数的单平台与双平台测定。

Cytometry Pub Date : 1999-12-15
I L Barbosa, M E Sousa, M I Godinho, F Sousa, A Carvalhais
{"title":"人CD34+细胞计数的单平台与双平台测定。","authors":"I L Barbosa,&nbsp;M E Sousa,&nbsp;M I Godinho,&nbsp;F Sousa,&nbsp;A Carvalhais","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We comparatively assessed CD34+ cell quantification by two of the recently available single platform assays, the IMAGN 2000 STELLer (Immucor, Lisbon, Portugal) microvolume fluorimetry and the ProCOUNT (BD-ENZIfarma, Lisbon, Portugal) flow cytometry, with our \"in-house\" dual-platform flow cytometric assay. The performance of the methods was evaluated by linearity and reproducibility tests. The linearity study, over a range of 0-1,200 CD34+ cell/microl, gave a good linear relationship for the three methods, with R(2) > 0.99. Precision tested at three different concentrations gave coefficients of variation ranging from 3.6-26.4% for the STELLertrade mark, 2.4-13.8% for the ProCOUNT, and 3.2-6.4% for flow cytometry. CD34+ cells were quantified in umbilical cord blood (UCB), UCB enriched-leukocyte buffy-coat (BC), mobilized peripheral blood (PB) and mobilized peripheral blood progenitor cells (PBPC) collected by leucapheresis, from a total of 72 samples. Flow cytometric results showed good linear correlation to the absolute counts obtained by the STELLer and ProCOUNT for all samples (R > 0.90 for all methods), with no differences when compared by paired tests (P > 0.05). Linear correlations between methods were also found when individually looking at the different cell sources: UCB or PB, BC, and PBPC, with low, intermediate and high CD34+ cell concentrations, respectively. Furthermore, with the exception of a significant difference between the ProCOUNT and STELLer results for UCB (P < 0.05), no other difference between methods was found for each of the individual populations (P > 0.05). To our knowledge, this is the first report in which the results are presented and analyzed according to each source of CD34+ cells. Our results show that the STELLer and the ProCOUNT are equally efficient for the dual-platform flow cytometric assay in CD34+ cell quantification.</p>","PeriodicalId":10947,"journal":{"name":"Cytometry","volume":"38 6","pages":"274-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Single- versus dual-platform assays for human CD34+ cell enumeration.\",\"authors\":\"I L Barbosa,&nbsp;M E Sousa,&nbsp;M I Godinho,&nbsp;F Sousa,&nbsp;A Carvalhais\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>We comparatively assessed CD34+ cell quantification by two of the recently available single platform assays, the IMAGN 2000 STELLer (Immucor, Lisbon, Portugal) microvolume fluorimetry and the ProCOUNT (BD-ENZIfarma, Lisbon, Portugal) flow cytometry, with our \\\"in-house\\\" dual-platform flow cytometric assay. The performance of the methods was evaluated by linearity and reproducibility tests. The linearity study, over a range of 0-1,200 CD34+ cell/microl, gave a good linear relationship for the three methods, with R(2) > 0.99. Precision tested at three different concentrations gave coefficients of variation ranging from 3.6-26.4% for the STELLertrade mark, 2.4-13.8% for the ProCOUNT, and 3.2-6.4% for flow cytometry. CD34+ cells were quantified in umbilical cord blood (UCB), UCB enriched-leukocyte buffy-coat (BC), mobilized peripheral blood (PB) and mobilized peripheral blood progenitor cells (PBPC) collected by leucapheresis, from a total of 72 samples. Flow cytometric results showed good linear correlation to the absolute counts obtained by the STELLer and ProCOUNT for all samples (R > 0.90 for all methods), with no differences when compared by paired tests (P > 0.05). Linear correlations between methods were also found when individually looking at the different cell sources: UCB or PB, BC, and PBPC, with low, intermediate and high CD34+ cell concentrations, respectively. Furthermore, with the exception of a significant difference between the ProCOUNT and STELLer results for UCB (P < 0.05), no other difference between methods was found for each of the individual populations (P > 0.05). To our knowledge, this is the first report in which the results are presented and analyzed according to each source of CD34+ cells. Our results show that the STELLer and the ProCOUNT are equally efficient for the dual-platform flow cytometric assay in CD34+ cell quantification.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10947,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cytometry\",\"volume\":\"38 6\",\"pages\":\"274-9\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1999-12-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cytometry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cytometry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们比较评估了CD34+细胞定量的两种最近可用的单平台分析,IMAGN 2000 STELLer (Immucor,里斯本,葡萄牙)微体积荧光法和ProCOUNT (hd - enzifarma,里斯本,葡萄牙)流式细胞术,与我们的“内部”双平台流式细胞分析。通过线性和重复性试验对方法的性能进行了评价。在0 ~ 1200 CD34+ cell/microl范围内,三种方法线性关系良好,R(2) > 0.99。在三种不同浓度下进行精度测试时,steller商标的变异系数为3.6-26.4%,ProCOUNT为2.4-13.8%,流式细胞术为3.2-6.4%。对采集的72例脐带血(UCB)、UCB富集白细胞白皮(BC)、动员外周血(PB)和动员外周血祖细胞(PBPC)中CD34+细胞进行定量分析。流式细胞术结果与STELLer和ProCOUNT获得的所有样品绝对计数呈良好的线性相关(所有方法的R > 0.90),配对检验比较无差异(P > 0.05)。当单独观察不同的细胞来源时,也发现了方法之间的线性相关性:UCB或PB, BC和PBPC,分别具有低,中和高CD34+细胞浓度。此外,除了ProCOUNT法和STELLer法对UCB的测定结果存在显著差异(P < 0.05)外,各组间差异不显著(P > 0.05)。据我们所知,这是第一份根据CD34+细胞的每种来源给出和分析结果的报告。我们的研究结果表明,STELLer和ProCOUNT在CD34+细胞定量的双平台流式细胞分析中同样有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Single- versus dual-platform assays for human CD34+ cell enumeration.

We comparatively assessed CD34+ cell quantification by two of the recently available single platform assays, the IMAGN 2000 STELLer (Immucor, Lisbon, Portugal) microvolume fluorimetry and the ProCOUNT (BD-ENZIfarma, Lisbon, Portugal) flow cytometry, with our "in-house" dual-platform flow cytometric assay. The performance of the methods was evaluated by linearity and reproducibility tests. The linearity study, over a range of 0-1,200 CD34+ cell/microl, gave a good linear relationship for the three methods, with R(2) > 0.99. Precision tested at three different concentrations gave coefficients of variation ranging from 3.6-26.4% for the STELLertrade mark, 2.4-13.8% for the ProCOUNT, and 3.2-6.4% for flow cytometry. CD34+ cells were quantified in umbilical cord blood (UCB), UCB enriched-leukocyte buffy-coat (BC), mobilized peripheral blood (PB) and mobilized peripheral blood progenitor cells (PBPC) collected by leucapheresis, from a total of 72 samples. Flow cytometric results showed good linear correlation to the absolute counts obtained by the STELLer and ProCOUNT for all samples (R > 0.90 for all methods), with no differences when compared by paired tests (P > 0.05). Linear correlations between methods were also found when individually looking at the different cell sources: UCB or PB, BC, and PBPC, with low, intermediate and high CD34+ cell concentrations, respectively. Furthermore, with the exception of a significant difference between the ProCOUNT and STELLer results for UCB (P < 0.05), no other difference between methods was found for each of the individual populations (P > 0.05). To our knowledge, this is the first report in which the results are presented and analyzed according to each source of CD34+ cells. Our results show that the STELLer and the ProCOUNT are equally efficient for the dual-platform flow cytometric assay in CD34+ cell quantification.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
NASA/American Cancer Society High-Resolution Flow Cytometry Project - II. Effect of pH and DAPI concentration on dual parametric analysis of DNA/DAPI fluorescence and electronic nuclear volume. Cell analysis system based on immunomagnetic cell selection and alignment followed by immunofluorescent analysis using compact disk technologies. Caffeine dissociates complexes between DNA and intercalating dyes: application for bleaching fluorochrome-stained cells for their subsequent restaining and analysis by laser scanning cytometry. Characterization of cytokine interactions by flow cytometry and factorial analysis. Multiparameter analysis of human epithelial tumor cell lines by laser scanning cytometry.
×
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