Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26122357›Full record

ArticleCancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII2015

Monitoring regulatory T cells in clinical samples: consensus on an essential marker set and gating strategy for regulatory T cell analysis by flow cytometry.

Saskia J A M Santegoets, Eveline M Dijkgraaf, Alessandra Battaglia, Philipp Beckhove, Cedrik M Britten, Awen Gallimore, Andrew Godkin, Cecile Gouttefangeas, Tanja D de Gruijl, Hans J P M Koenen and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 132 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
132citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

132 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Exploring cannabidiol effects on inflammatory markers in individuals with cocaine use disorder: a randomized controlled trial.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2021
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

72 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

18 authors.

Saskia J A M SantegoetsDepartment of Clinical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), Leiden, The Netherlands, s.j.a.m.santegoets@lumc.nl.
Eveline M Dijkgraaf
Alessandra Battaglia
Philipp Beckhove
Cedrik M Britten
Awen Gallimore
Andrew Godkin
Cecile Gouttefangeas
Tanja D de Gruijl
Hans J P M Koenen
Alexander Scheffold
Ethan M Shevach
Janet Staats
Kjetil Taskén
Theresa L Whiteside
Judith R Kroep
Marij J P Welters
Sjoerd H van der Burg

Funding

Social and Behavioral Sciences CoreP30AI064518 · NIAID · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI Nwora Lance Okeke · 2005 to 2026
$50.5M
Studies of Human T Regulatory CellsZIAAI001046 · NIAID · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES · PI SHEVACH, ETHAN · 2009 to 2025
$10.5M
Restoring anti-tumor immunity in the microenvironment of head and neck cancerR01CA168628 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI WHITESIDE, THERESA L. · 2013 to 2017
$1.7M
Intramural NIH HHSNCI NIH HHS R01 CA168628NCI NIH HHS R01-CA168628NIAID NIH HHS 5P30 AI064518NIAID NIH HHS P30 AI064518Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 086983/Z/08/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Regulatory T cell (Treg)-mediated immunosuppression is considered a major obstacle for successful cancer immunotherapy. The association between clinical outcome and Tregs is being studied extensively in clinical trials, but unfortunately, no consensus has been reached about (a) the markers and (b) the gating strategy required to define human Tregs in this context, making it difficult to draw final conclusions. Therefore, we have organized an international workshop on the detection and functional testing of Tregs with leading experts in the field, and 40 participants discussing different analyses and the importance of different markers and context in which Tregs were analyzed. This resulted in a rationally composed ranking list of "Treg markers". Subsequently, the proposed Treg markers were tested to get insight into the overlap/differences between the most frequently used Treg definitions and their utility for Treg detection in various human tissues. Here, we conclude that the CD3, CD4, CD25, CD127, and FoxP3 markers are the minimally required markers to define human Treg cells. Staining for Ki67 and CD45RA showed to provide additional information on the activation status of Tregs. The use of markers was validated in a series of PBMC from healthy donors and cancer patients, as well as in tumor-draining lymph nodes and freshly isolated tumors. In conclusion, we propose an essential marker set comprising antibodies to CD3, CD4, CD25, CD127, Foxp3, Ki67, and CD45RA and a corresponding robust gating strategy for the context-dependent analysis of Tregs by flow cytometry.

Indexed as

Flow CytometryAnimalsAntigens, CDBiomarkersCells, CulturedCell SeparationConsensusFemaleForkhead Transcription FactorsHumansInternational CooperationKi-67 AntigenLymphocyte ActivationMonitoring, ImmunologicOvarian NeoplasmsReference StandardsAntigens, CDBiomarkersForkhead Transcription FactorsFOXP3 protein, humanKi-67 Antigen

Identifiers

PMID26122357
PMCPMC4554737

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.