ArticleVirology journal2026
Evaluating the utility of a nanoscale flow cytometer for detection of surface proteins on HIV and extracellular vesicles.
Article in Virology journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFlow virometry (FV) - the application of flow cytometry to viruses - has historically been hindered by the inability of cytometers to detect particles below ~ 300 nm in size. However, advances in optics and fluidics have enabled cytometers primarily designed for cells to detect viruses and extracellular vesicles (EVs) through light scatter alone. In 2024, the CytoFLEX nano was released, marketed for the detection of particles as small as 40 nm; however, its performance has yet to be compared to a conventional instrument for FV.
methodsFV was utilized to evaluate performance of the CytoFLEX nano and a conventional flow cytometer (CytoFLEX S). Instrument scatter sensitivity was assessed using NIST beads (40-400 nm), and virus stocks [human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), human coronaviruses (HCoV)-229E and HCoV-OC43]. For fluorescence analysis, HIV virions were stained with PE- and BV421-conjugated antibodies targeting virion incorporated proteins (CD38, CD44), individually and in combination. Finally, HIV stocks were labeled with antibodies against the envelope (Env) glycoprotein and tetraspanins (CD9, CD81) to assess EVs within virus preparations.
resultsCompared to the CytoFLEX S, the CytoFLEX nano exhibited substantially greater scatter sensitivity, reflected by up to 50-fold higher signal-to-noise ratio across NIST-traceable beads and virus samples. This enabled clearer resolution of smaller populations, including bead populations < 70 nm that were undetectable on the CytoFLEX S, as well as improved resolution across all viruses. While both instruments reliably detected stained proteins on HIV virions, the CytoFLEX nano revealed a distinct population of tetraspanin-positive EVs within HIV stocks that was undetected on the CytoFLEX S. Using GFP-tagged HIV, we identified Env
conclusionsThe CytoFLEX nano exhibited markedly improved scatter sensitivity compared to the CytoFLEX S, improving detection of viruses and enabling detection of EV populations that were undetectable on the conventional instrument. While both platforms performed similarly for surface protein labeling, additional consideration of spectral overlap was needed with the CytoFLEX nano in multicolor experiments. These findings highlight that the complementary strengths of each platform can be utilized to more comprehensively characterize virus and EV populations, providing new opportunities to investigate nanoparticle heterogeneity.
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.