Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40970846›Full record

ArticleCurrent protocols2025

Introducing the Dish Soap Protocol: A Unified Approach for Multi-Modal Intracellular Staining.

Oliver T Burton, James Dooley, Adrian Liston

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current protocols, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Oliver T BurtonDepartment of Pathology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3884-7373
James DooleyDepartment of Pathology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Adrian ListonDepartment of Pathology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent advances in dyes and cytometers have seen an exponential increase in the ability to perform multidimensional flow cytometry. As we increase our capacity to extract information from cells, the need to acquire different types of data simultaneously from the same cells becomes limited by fixation buffer compatibility. Accessing the intracellular compartments for staining, particularly with large molecular weight structures such as antibody-fluorophore conjugates, requires a balance between solubilizing lipids to create entry points through the membranes, while using crosslinking fixatives to maintain structural integrity of the cell and prevent the loss of intracellular contents. Unfortunately, common fixation protocols result in a trade-off, where preservation of fluorescent proteins and accessibility of nuclear staining are often diametrically opposed. In this article, we detail the impact of various fix-perm reagents on key features, such as nuclear staining, green fluorescent protein (GFP) retention, intracellular cytokine staining, epitope retention, scatter profiles, cell recovery, and fluorophore stability. We provide a protocol for the use of "Burton's Best Buffer", which is readily made at 100-fold lower cost than commercial buffers, which can be used to overcome the limitations of current fixation buffers and achieve simultaneous efficient detection of transcription factors, cytokines, and endogenous fluorescent proteins, among other uses. © 2025 The Author(s). Current Protocols published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. Basic Protocol: Dish soap protocol.

Indexed as

Flow CytometryStaining and LabelingFluorescent DyesGreen Fluorescent ProteinsHumansFluorescent DyesGreen Fluorescent Proteinsflow cytometryGFPimmune phenotypingintracellular stainingspectral flow cytometry

Identifiers

PMID40970846
PMCPMC12447862

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.