ArticlePloS one2023
Standardization of flow cytometry and cell sorting to enable a transcriptomic analysis in a multi-site sarcoidosis study.
Article in PloS one, 2023. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells protect against obstetric deep venous thrombosis in rats by suppressing ferroptosis.Stem cell research & therapy · 2025Article
- Online survey on existing sarcoidosis registries and biobanks: an ERN lung initiative.Sarcoidosis, vasculitis, and diffuse lung diseases : official journal of WASOG · 2024Article
- Applications of Flow Cytometry in Drug Discovery and Translational Research.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The contribution and regulation of various CD4+ T cell lineages that occur with remitting vs progressive courses in sarcoidosis are poorly understood. We developed a multiparameter flow cytometry panel to sort these CD4+ T cell lineages followed by measurement of their functional potential using RNA-sequencing analysis at six-month intervals across multiple study sites. To obtain good quality RNA for sequencing, we relied on chemokine receptor expression to identify and sort lineages. To minimize gene expression changes induced by perturbations of T cells and avoid protein denaturation caused by freeze/thaw cycles, we optimized our protocols using freshly isolated samples at each study site. To accomplish this study, we had to overcome significant standardization challenges across multiple sites. Here, we detail standardization considerations for cell processing, flow staining, data acquisition, sorting parameters, and RNA quality control analysis that were performed as part of the NIH-sponsored, multi-center study, BRonchoscopy at Initial sarcoidosis diagnosis Targeting longitudinal Endpoints (BRITE). After several rounds of iterative optimization, we identified the following aspects as critical for successful standardization: 1) alignment of PMT voltages across sites using CS&T/rainbow bead technology; 2) a single template created in the cytometer program that was used by all sites to gate cell populations during data acquisition and cell sorting; 3) use of standardized lyophilized flow cytometry staining cocktails to reduce technical error during processing; 4) development and implementation of a standardized Manual of Procedures. After standardization of cell sorting, we were able to determine the minimum number of sorted cells necessary for next generation sequencing through analysis of RNA quality and quantity from sorted T cell populations. Overall, we found that implementing a multi-parameter cell sorting with RNA-seq analysis clinical study across multiple study sites requires iteratively tested standardized procedures to ensure comparable and high-quality results.
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.