ArticleBMC research notes2020
Single-site, five-year experience with human eosinophil isolation by density gradient centrifugation and CD16 immunomagnetic negative separation.
Article in BMC research notes, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Eosinophil IL-5Rα/JAK2/STAT5 Signaling Contributes to Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition in Eosinophilic Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Interactions between Siglec-8 and endogenous sialylated cis ligands restrain cell death induction in human eosinophils and mast cells.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Article
- Siglec-8 Signals Through a Non-Canonical Pathway to Cause Human Eosinophil DeathFrontiers in immunology · 2021Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveLittle has been reported regarding the reliability of methods for the purification of human blood eosinophils. We retrospectively reviewed our experience with 350 consecutive eosinophil isolations.
resultsBetween January 2014 and December 2018, we conducted 350 eosinophil purifications from 83 donors. Absolute eosinophil count (AEC), calculated from hospital complete blood counts when available (n = 289), ranged from 32 to 1352 eosinophils/µL ([Formula: see text]: 179 ± 136/µL). Eosinophil yields ranged from 0.4 to 24.4 million cells per 20 mL of blood drawn ([Formula: see text]: 3.1 ± 1.9 million eosinophils) with > 98% purity. Comparing AEC to actual yield, recovery was 87% ± 29% ([Formula: see text]) and AEC strongly correlated with yield. To explore the reproducibility of yield, a subsequent analysis was limited to those donors drawn ≥ 3 times (N = 35), and there was no difference in the average coefficient of variation for yield between allergic and non-allergic donors. Viability of isolated eosinophils was consistently > 95% and after 24 h of culture did not differ between allergic and non-allergic donors. We conclude that this immunomagnetic separation method for human eosinophil isolation from whole blood is a reliable, reproducible technique for obtaining an average of 87% yield with high purity and viability.
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.