4.3 Article

Nine-color flow cytometry for accurate measurement of T cell subsets and cytokine responses. Part I: Panel design by an empiric approach

期刊

CYTOMETRY PART A
卷 73A, 期 5, 页码 400-410

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cyto.a.20555

关键词

polychromatic flow cytometry; T cell immunophenotyping; fluorochrome conjugated antibody; compensation

资金

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [C06RR-12088-01, C06 RR012088] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIAID NIH HHS [R01 AI051999-03, AI051999, R01 AI051999] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Polychromatic flow cytometry offers the unprecedented ability to investigate multiple antigens per cell. Unfortunately, unwanted spectral overlaps and compensation problems increase when more than four colors are used, but these problems can be minimized if staining combinations are chosen carefully. We used an empiric approach to design, test and identify six-color T cell immunophenotyping reagent panels that can be expanded to include three or more functional or other markers in the FITC, PE, and APC channels without significant spectral limitations. Thirty different six-color T cell surface antigen reagent panels were constructed to identify major T cell subsets and maturational subtypes as defined by CCR7 and CD45RA expression, while excluding monocytes, B and non-viable cells. Staining performance of each panel was compared on cryopreserved cells from a single healthy donor recorded on a multiparameter cell sorter. Ten of the thirty reagent panels offered reliable resolution of T cell major and maturational surface markers. Of these, two panels were selected that showed the least spectral overlap and resulting background increase in the FITC, PE, and APC channels. These channels were left unoccupied for inclusion of additional phenotypic or functional markers, such as cytokines. Careful reagent titration and testing of multiple candidate panels are necessary to ensure quality results in multiparametric measurements. (C) 2008 International Society for Advancement of Cytometry.

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

4.3
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