2010
DOI: 10.1002/cyto.a.21000
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reevaluation of quantitative flow cytometric analysis for TLR2 on monocytes using F(ab′)2 fragments of monoclonal antibodies

Abstract: In patients with refractory infections, reliable markers that monitor the severity and healing process are needed. The expression level of toll-like receptor 2 (TLR2) on monocytes is such candidate. In the conventional assay system, the whole IgG (wIgG) form of anti-TLR2 mAb has been used with control IgG, which blocks nonantigen-specific bindings. However, the competitive reactions against Fcc receptors (FccRs) between labeled anti-TLR2 mAbs and control IgG should be considered. Our goal was to precisely quan… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
2
1
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 35 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Previous results reported for TLRs in other PD cohorts are conflicting (34, 35, 37). Several factors might account for this: namely, the constitutively low TLR4 surface expression and its tightly regulated endocytic transport, which may be influenced during blood purification; the age-dependent TLR downregulation (61); and the unspecific binding of non-recombinant TLR2 antibodies (62). Altogether, this makes TLRs difficult markers to compare across studies.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previous results reported for TLRs in other PD cohorts are conflicting (34, 35, 37). Several factors might account for this: namely, the constitutively low TLR4 surface expression and its tightly regulated endocytic transport, which may be influenced during blood purification; the age-dependent TLR downregulation (61); and the unspecific binding of non-recombinant TLR2 antibodies (62). Altogether, this makes TLRs difficult markers to compare across studies.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%