Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23788464›Full record

ArticleCytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology2013

A harmonized approach to intracellular cytokine staining gating: Results from an international multiconsortia proficiency panel conducted by the Cancer Immunotherapy Consortium (CIC/CRI).

Lisa K McNeil, Leah Price, Cedrik M Britten, Maria Jaimes, Holden Maecker, Kunle Odunsi, Junko Matsuzaki, Janet S Staats, Jerill Thorpe, Jianda Yuan and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 64 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Guidelines for Gating Flow Cytometry Data for Immunological Assays.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2027
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Data-Driven Flow Cytometry Analysis.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2019
    Review
  20. Activated integrins identify functional antigen-specific CD8Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2018
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 9 institutions in 2 countries.

Lisa K McNeilPfizer Vaccines, Pearl River, NY 10965, USA. lisa.k.mcneil@pfizer.com
Leah Price
Cedrik M Britten
Maria Jaimes
Holden Maecker
Kunle Odunsi
Junko Matsuzaki
Janet S Staats
Jerill Thorpe
Jianda Yuan
Sylvia Janetzki
Cancer Research Institute · USRoswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center · USBD Biosciences (United States) · USBehavioral Tech Research, Inc. · USDuke Medical Center · USMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USNew York University · USStanford University · USTranslationale Onkologie an der Universitätsmedizin der Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz · DE

Funding

Two-Spirit Films in Indigenous Cancer HealthP30CA016056 · NCI · ROSWELL PARK CANCER INSTITUTE CORP · PI MARK G FRATTINI · 1985 to 2026
$116.6M
Translational Oncology Research Program (Project-005)P30CA124435 · NCI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Melinda L. Telli · 2007 to 2026
$71.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016056NCI NIH HHS P30 CA124435
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous results from two proficiency panels of intracellular cytokine staining (ICS) from the Cancer Immunotherapy Consortium and panels from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease and the Association for Cancer Immunotherapy highlight the variability across laboratories in reported % CD8+ or % CD4+ cytokine-positive cells. One of the main causes of interassay variability in flow cytometry-based assays is due to differences in gating strategies between laboratories, which may prohibit the generation of robust results within single centers and across institutions. To study how gating strategies affect the variation in reported results, a gating panel was organized where all participants analyzed the same set of Flow Cytometry Standard (FCS) files from a four-color ICS assay using their own gating protocol (Phase I) and a gating protocol drafted by consensus from the organizers of the panel (Phase II). Focusing on analysis removed donor, assay, and instrument variation, enabling us to quantify the variability caused by gating alone. One hundred ten participating laboratories applied 110 different gating approaches. This led to high variability in the reported percentage of cytokine-positive cells and consequently in response detection in Phase I. However, variability was dramatically reduced when all laboratories used the same gating strategy (Phase II). Proximity of the cytokine gate to the negative population most impacted true-positive and false-positive response detection. Recommendations are provided for the (1) placement of the cytokine-positive gate, (2) identification of CD4+ CD8+ double-positive T cells, (3) placement of lymphocyte gate, (4) inclusion of dim cells, (5) gate uniformity, and 6) proper adjustment of the biexponential scaling.

Indexed as

CD4-Positive T-LymphocytesCD8-Positive T-LymphocytesCytokinesFlow CytometryHumansImmunotherapyInternational CooperationLaboratoriesLaboratory Proficiency TestingNeoplasmsReproducibility of ResultsStaining and LabelingCytokinesassay harmonizationgatingICSimmune monitoringproficiency panel

Identifiers

PMID23788464
PMCPMC4443815
OpenAlexW1562818110

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.