Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33740004›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Establishing CD19 B-cell reference control materials for comparable and quantitative cytometric expression analysis.

Lili Wang, Rukmini Bhardwaj, Howard Mostowski, Paul N Patrone, Anthony J Kearsley, Jessica Watson, Liang Lim, Jothir Pichaandi, Olga Ornatsky, Daniel Majonis and 2 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Standardization of flow cytometric detection of antigen expression.Cytometry. Part B, Clinical cytometry · 2024
    Article
  3. Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

12 authors.

Lili WangBiosystems and Biomaterials Division, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Gaithersburg, Maryland, United States of America.
Rukmini BhardwajOffice of Tissues and Advanced Therapies, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Silver Spring, Maryland, United States of America.
Howard MostowskiOffice of Tissues and Advanced Therapies, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Silver Spring, Maryland, United States of America.
Paul N PatroneApplied and Computational Mathematics Division, NIST, Gaithersburg, Maryland, United States of America.
Anthony J KearsleyApplied and Computational Mathematics Division, NIST, Gaithersburg, Maryland, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9576-0621
Jessica WatsonFluidigm Canada, Markham, Canada.
Liang LimFluidigm Canada, Markham, Canada.
Jothir PichaandiFluidigm Canada, Markham, Canada.
Olga OrnatskyFluidigm Canada, Markham, Canada.
Daniel MajonisFluidigm Canada, Markham, Canada.
Steven R BauerOffice of Tissues and Advanced Therapies, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Silver Spring, Maryland, United States of America.
Heba A DegheidyOffice of Tissues and Advanced Therapies, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Silver Spring, Maryland, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-4461-4173

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the field of cell-based therapeutics, there is a great need for high-quality, robust, and validated measurements for cell characterization. Flow cytometry has emerged as a critically important platform due to its high-throughput capability and its ability to simultaneously measure multiple parameters in the same sample. However, to assure the confidence in measurement, well characterized biological reference materials are needed for standardizing clinical assays and harmonizing flow cytometric results between laboratories. To date, the lack of adequate reference materials, and the complexity of the cytometer instrumentation have resulted in few standards. This study was designed to evaluate CD19 expression in three potential biological cell reference materials and provide a preliminary assessment of their suitability to support future development of CD19 reference standards. Three commercially available human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) obtained from three different manufacturers were tested. Variables that could potentially contribute to the differences in the CD19 expression, such as PBMCs manufacturing process, number of healthy donors used in manufacturing each PBMC lot, antibody reagent, operators, and experimental days were included in our evaluation. CD19 antibodies bound per cell (ABC) values were measured using two flow cytometry-based quantification schemes with two independent calibration methods, a single point calibration using a CD4 reference cell and QuantiBrite PE bead calibration. Three lots of PBMC from three different manufacturers were obtained. Each lot of PBMC was tested on three different experimental days by three operators using three different lots of unimolar anti-CD19PE conjugates. CD19 ABC values were obtained in parallel on a selected lot of the PBMC samples using mass spectrometry (CyTOF) with two independent calibration methods, EQ4 and bead-based calibration were evaluated with CyTOF-technology. Including all studied variabilities such as PBMC lot, antibody reagent lot, and operator, the averaged mean values of CD19 ABC for the three PBMC manufacturers (A,B, and C) obtained by flow cytometry were found to be: 7953 with a %CV of 9.0 for PBMC-A, 10535 with a %CV of 7.8 for PBMC-B, and 12384 with a %CV of 16 for PBMC-C. These CD19 ABC values agree closely with the findings using CyTOF. The averaged mean values of CD19 ABC for the tested PBMCs is 9295 using flow cytometry-based method and 9699 using CyTOF. The relative contributions from various sources of uncertainty in CD19 ABC values were quantified for the flow cytometry-based measurement scheme. This uncertainty analysis suggests that the number of antigens or ligand binding sites per cell in each PBMC preparation is the largest source of variability. On the other hand, the calibration method does not add significant uncertainty to the expression estimates. Our preliminary assessment showed the suitability of the tested materials to serve as PBMC-based CD19+ reference control materials for use in quantifying relevant B cell markers in B cell lymphoproliferative disorders and immunotherapy. However, users should consider the variabilities resulting from different lots of PBMC and antibody reagent when utilizing cell-based reference materials for quantification purposes and perform bridging studies to ensure harmonization between the results before switching to a new lot.

Indexed as

Antigens, CD19B-LymphocytesFlow CytometryHumansLeukocytes, MononuclearReference StandardsAntigens, CD19

Identifiers

PMID33740004
PMCPMC7978366

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.