3.8 Article

Evaluation of cytolytic activity and phenotypic changes of circulating blood immune cells in patients with colorectal cancer by a simple preparation of peripheral blood mononuclear cells

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE KOREAN SURGICAL SOCIETY
卷 85, 期 5, 页码 230-235

出版社

KOREAN SURGICAL SOCIETY
DOI: 10.4174/jkss.2013.85.5.230

关键词

Blood cells; Natural killer cells; Immunologic cytotoxicity; Colorectal neoplasms

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: This study aimed to assess the cytolytic activity and the phenotype of circulating blood immune cells in cancer patients by using a simple preparation of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). Methods: Peripheral blood was obtained from 94 diagnosed colorectal cancer (CRC) patients and 112 healthy donors. PBMCs were cocultured with K562 cells for 2 hours and lactate dehydrogenase released from the dead K562 cells was measured by using a spectrophotometer. Meanwhile, PBMCs were stained with fluorescence conjugated monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and analyzed by flow cytometry. Results: The cytolytic activity of PBMCs were significantly different between CRC patient and healthy groups (8.82 +/- 3.84% vs. 17.51 +/- 8.57 +/- P < 0.001). However, no significant difference in the cytolytic activity was observed after surgery in the CRC patient group (before surgery, 8.82% 3.84% vs. after surgery, 9.95 +/- 4.94; P = 0.326). In addition, the percentage of peripheral blood natural killer cells was significantly higher in the preoperative patient group than in the healthy group (19.97 +/- 11.51 +/- vs. 15.60 +/- 5.77%, P = 0.041). In contrast, the percentage of peripheral blood lymphocytes was lower in the preoperative patient group than in the healthy group (28.41% 8.31% vs. 36.4 +/- 8.6%, P <0.001). Conclusion: These results demonstrate that circulating blood immune cells of CRC patients are functionally impaired and undergo an immunophenotypic perturbation, and show that a simple preparation of PBMCs can be useful to evaluate cellular immunity in cancer.

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

3.8
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