4.6 Article

Using an RNA aptamer probe for flow cytometry detection of CD30-expressing lymphoma cells

期刊

LABORATORY INVESTIGATION
卷 89, 期 12, 页码 1423-1432

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/labinvest.2009.113

关键词

aptamer probe; CD30 expression; cell binding; flow cytometry analysis; lymphoma diagnosis; RNA oligonucleotide

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [5K22CA113493]
  2. BCM-Methodist lymphoma SPORE
  3. TMHRI scholar and Clinical Translation Study Award
  4. NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE [K22CA113493, R01CA151955] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aptamers are small molecular ligands composed of short oligonucleotides that bind targets with high affinity. In contrast to antibodies, as synthetic oligonucleotides, aptamers have lower production costs and elicit no antigenic reactions. Therefore, aptamers are potential agents for disease diagnosis and treatment. In this study, we validate a fluorescently labeled RNA aptamer, which has been reported to bind specifically to mouse CD30 proteins in solution, for human CD30 protein recognition on intact cells. The aptamer probe was tested with cultured anaplastic large cell lymphoma and Hodgkin's lymphoma cells that express high levels of CD30. Flow cytometry and fluorescence microscopy showed specific and sensitive binding of the aptamer probe to CD30-expressing lymphoma cells at low concentrations (0.3 nM). Studies performed on multiple cell lines and nuclear cells from healthy donors confirmed that the CD30 aptamer and anti-CD30 antibody, the standard clinical probe, recognized the same set of cells. The potential application of multicolor flow cytometry analysis using the CD30 aptamer probe and antibodies was also shown. In conclusion, the developed CD30 aptamer probe could act as a replacement and/or a supplement for antibodies in the diagnosis of the CD30-expressing lymphomas. Laboratory Investigation (2009) 89, 1423-1432; doi:10.1038/labinvest.2009.113; published online 12 October 2009

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据