3.9 Article

Development of a clinical assay to evaluate toll-like receptor function

Journal

CLINICAL AND VACCINE IMMUNOLOGY
Volume 13, Issue 1, Pages 68-76

Publisher

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/CVI.13.1.68-76.2006

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Toll-like receptors (TLRS) recognize pathogen-associated molecular patterns to enable innate immune responses. A number of genetic defects influencing the function of these receptors have been identified and are associated with recurrent and/or severe infection. Our goal was to develop a reproducible assay of TLR function in order to evaluate patients with recurrent infection who would be suspected of having a genetic defect affecting TLR signaling. We chose to study peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCS) to avoid potential influences of soluble factors contained in whole blood, and we utilized ligands for TLRS 1/2, 2/6, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 9. Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) production in PBMC supernatants was measured by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay after TLR ligand stimulation and was dependent on gene transcription and NF-kappa B activation. Some variables affecting the assay were assessed, including the effects of. blood anticoagulant, serum-containing media, incubation time, ligand storage, blood storage time, and cell cryopreservation. By using optimized assay conditions, effective concentrations of individual ligands and mean responses to those ligands were established for healthy control donors. Finally, three patients with a mutation in the IKBKG gene, encoding the NF-kappa B essential modulator (NEMO) protein, were evaluated as disease controls and were almost uniformly below the standard deviation of healthy donors for all ligands tested. Although a number of variables influence TLR ligand-induced TNF responses, this assay can be optimized for potential clinical use to screen patients with primary immunodeficiencies affecting TLR function.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available