4.2 Article

A reliable and simplified sj/β-TREC ratio quantification method for human thymic output measurement

Journal

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGICAL METHODS
Volume 352, Issue 1-2, Pages 111-117

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jim.2009.11.007

Keywords

Sj-TREC; D beta J beta-TREC; TREC ratio; Intrathymic proliferation; HIV; Human thymic function

Funding

  1. Fondo de Investigaciones Sanitarias [FIS06/00176, CP08/00172]
  2. Fundacion la para la Investigacion y la Prevencion del SIDA en Espana (FIPSE) [12481/05, 36624/06]
  3. Redes Tematicas de Investigacion en SIDA [ISCIII RETIC RD06/0006/0021]
  4. Redes Tematicas de Cardiovascular [ISCIII RECAVA RD06/0014]
  5. Proyecto de Excelencia, Consejeria de Innovacion, Ciencia y Empresa [P06-CTS-01579]
  6. Consejeria de Salud, Servicio Andaluz de Salud [156/2006, PI0366/07]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Current techniques to peripherally assess thymic function are: the signal-joint T-cell receptor excision circle (sj-TREC) level measurement and the naive T cell and CD31 + TREC-rich subset determination. However, all of them are indirect approaches and none could be considered a direct recent thymic emigrant (RTE) marker. To overcome their limitations, Dion et al. (2004) described the sj/beta-TREC ratio that allows the peripheral quantification of the double negative to double positive intrathymic proliferation step. Nevertheless, the protocol described is expensive, sample and time-consuming, thus, limiting its usefulness. In this study, we describe a simplified protocol that reduces from 33 to 9 the amount of PCR reaction needed but maintaining the sensitivity and reproducibility of the original technique. In addition, we corroborated the effectiveness of our technique as an accurate thymic output-related marker by correlating the peripheral sj/beta-TREC ratio with a direct measurement of thymic function as the percentage of double positive thymocytes (r = 0.601, p < 0.001). (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available