Search

We evaluated the effect of specimen processing variations and quantitation methods on quantitative determination of CD38 expression on CD8 T lymphocytes. Neither lysing reagent (ammonium chloride versus BD FACSlyse), fixation (paraformaldehyde versus no final fixation step), nor acquisition delay (acquisition within 6 h after fixation versus 24 h after fixation) had a significant effect on CD38 relative fluorescent intensity or CD38 quantitative estimates (RFI or antibodies bound per cell). The only significant difference in fluorescent intensity and CD38 antibodies bound per cell (ABC) was encountered when whole blood was held for 24 h prior to staining and fixation and then acquired after another 24-h hold. However, for all sample processing methods above, the CD4 biologic calibrator and QuantiBRITE bead methods gave significantly different estimates of CD38 intensity. In many cases, however, these differences are relatively small and were more pronounced in certain laboratories. We conclude that there is some flexibility in sample processing methods for quantitative CD38 determination; however, it is preferable for a laboratory to employ one method of fluorescence quantitation calculation consistently because small differences are detected between different methods. Cytometry (Comm. Clin. Cytometry) 42:174-179, 2000., (Copyright 2000 Wiley-Liss, Inc.)

Background: Flow cytometry of immunofluorescence and DNA content provides measures of cell-cycle-related gene expression (protein and/or epitope levels) for asynchronously growing cells. From these data, time-related expression through S phase can be directly measured. However, for G1, G2, and M phases, this information is unavailable. We present an objective method to model G1 and G2 kinetic expression from an estimate of a minimum biological unit of positive immunofluorescence derived from the distribution of specific immunofluorescence of mitotic cells., Methods: DU 145 cells were stained for DNA, cyclin B1, and a mitotic marker (p105) and analyzed by flow cytometry. The cyclin B1 immunofluorescence (B1) distribution of p105-positive cells was used to model the B1 distribution of G2 and G1 cells. The G1/S and S/G2 interface measurements were used to calculate expression in S phase and test the validity of the approach., Results: B1 at S/G2 closely matched the earliest modeled estimate of B1 in G2. B1 increased linearly through G1 and S but exponentially through G2; mitotic levels were equivalent to the highest G2 levels. G1 modeling of B1 was less certain than that of G2 due to low levels of expression but demonstrated general feasibility., Conclusions: By this method, the upper and lower bounds of cyclin B1 expression could be estimated and kinetic expression through G1, G2, and M modeled. Together with direct measurements in S phase, expression of B1 throughout the entire cell cycle of DU 145 cells could be modeled. The method should be generally applicable given model-specific assumptions.