ArticlePloS one2012
Collection of aerosolized human cytokines using Teflon® filters.
Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCollection of exhaled breath samples for the analysis of inflammatory biomarkers is an important area of research aimed at improving our ability to diagnose, treat and understand the mechanisms of chronic pulmonary disease. Current collection methods based on condensation of water vapor from exhaled breath yield biomarker levels at or near the detection limits of immunoassays contributing to problems with reproducibility and validity of biomarker measurements. In this study, we compare the collection efficiency of two aerosol-to-liquid sampling devices to a filter-based collection method for recovery of dilute laboratory generated aerosols of human cytokines so as to identify potential alternatives to exhaled breath condensate collection. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL
findingsTwo aerosol-to-liquid sampling devices, the SKC® Biosampler and Omni 3000™, as well as Teflon® filters were used to collect aerosols of human cytokines generated using a HEART nebulizer and single-pass aerosol chamber setup in order to compare the collection efficiencies of these sampling methods. Additionally, methods for the use of Teflon® filters to collect and measure cytokines recovered from aerosols were developed and evaluated through use of a high-sensitivity multiplex immunoassay. Our results show successful collection of cytokines from pg/m(3) aerosol concentrations using Teflon® filters and measurement of cytokine levels in the sub-picogram/mL concentration range using a multiplex immunoassay with sampling times less than 30 minutes. Significant degradation of cytokines was observed due to storage of cytokines in concentrated filter extract solutions as compared to storage of dry filters.
conclusionsUse of filter collection methods resulted in significantly higher efficiency of collection than the two aerosol-to-liquid samplers evaluated in our study. The results of this study provide the foundation for a potential new technique to evaluate biomarkers of inflammation in exhaled breath samples.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.