Chronic bacterial colonization of the lungs, with an excessive inflammatory response, is the major cause of morbidity and mortality in cystic fibrosis. Lung surfactant exhibits a spectrum of potential immunomodulatory properties: phospholipid components inhibit cellular inflammatory responses, whereas the hydrophilic surfactant proteins A (SP-A) and D (SP-D) are integral components of the innate host defense response of the lungs against bacterial infection. Consequently, alteration to the relative proportions of lung surfactant components may alter the susceptibility of the lungs to bacterial colonization. In this study, bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) samples were collected at diagnostic fiberoptic bronchoscopy from 11 control children, 13 children with cystic fibrosis, and 11 children with acute lung infection. Electrospray ionization mass spectrometry analysis demonstrated negligible changes to the molecular species or total BAL concentrations of phosphatidylcholine, phosphatidylglycerol, or phosphatidylinositol among the three subject groups. In contrast, median SP-A concentration was decreased (P < 0.001) in the cystic fibrosis group (2.65 microg/ml) compared with control (12.35 microg/ml) and infection (9.76 microg/ml) groups. Median SP-D was also decreased (P < 0.05) in the infection (12.17 ng/ml) compared with the control group (641 ng/ml), and was below assay limits for the majority of cystic fibrosis children (P < 0. 001). This dramatic decrease of hydrophilic surfactant proteins in the presence of normal surfactant phospholipid may be one mechanism underlying the relative ineffectiveness of the cellular inflammatory response in killing invading bacteria in the lungs of patients with cystic fibrosis.
No consensus has been reached on how to determine if an immune response has been detected based on raw data from an ELISPOT assay. The goal of this paper is to enable investigators to understand and readily implement currently available methods for response determination. We describe empirical and statistical approaches, identifying the strengths and limitations of each approach to allow readers to rationally select and apply a scientifically sound method appropriate to their specific laboratory setting. Five representative approaches were applied to data sets from the CIMT Immunoguiding Program and the response detection and false positive rates were compared. Simulation studies were also performed to compare empirical and statistical approaches. Based on these, we recommend the use of a non-parametric statistical test. Further, we recommend that six medium control wells or four wells each for both medium control and experimental conditions be performed to increase the sensitivity in detecting a response, that replicates with large variation in spot counts be filtered out, and that positive responses arising from experimental spot counts below the estimated limit of detection be interpreted with caution. Moreover, a web-based user interface was developed to allow easy access to the recommended statistical methods. This interface allows the user to upload data from an ELISPOT assay and obtain an output file of the binary responses.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00262-010-0875-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
The interpretation of the results obtained from immunomonitoring of clinical trials is a diYcult task due to the variety of methods and protocols available to detect vaccine-speciWc T-cell responses. This heterogeneity as well as the lack of standards has led to signiWcant scepticism towards published results. In February 2005, a working group was therefore founded under the aegis of the Association for Immunotherapy of Cancer ("CIMT") in order to compare techniques and protocols applied for the enumeration of antigen-speciWc T-cell responses. Here we present the results from two consecutive phases of an international inter-laboratory testing project referred to as the "CIMT monitoring panel". A total of 13 centers from six European countries participated in the study in which pretested PBMC samples, synthetic peptides and PE-conjugated HLA-tetramers were prepared centrally and distributed to participants. All were asked to determine the number of antigen-speciWc T-cells in each sample using tetramer staining and one functional assay. The results of the Wrst testing round revealed that the total number of cells analyzed was the most important determinant for the sensitive detection of antigen-speciWc CD8 + T-cells by tetramer staining. Analysis by ELISPOT was inXuenced by a combination of cell number and a resting phase after thawing of peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Therefore, the experiments were repeated in a second phase but now the participants were asked to change their protocols according to the new guidelines distilled from the results of the Wrst phase. 123The recommendations improved the number of antigenspeciWc T-cell responses that were detected and decreased the variability between the laboratories. We conclude that a two-step approach in inter-laboratory testing allows the identiWcation of distinct variables that inXuence the sensitivity of diVerent T-cell assays and to formally show that a deWned correction to the protocols successfully increases the sensitivity and reduces the inter-center variability. Such "two-step" inter-laboratory projects could deWne rational bases for accepted international guidelines and thereby lead to the harmonization of the techniques used for immune monitoring.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.