4.2 Review

Establishment and maintenance of a PBMC repository for functional cellular studies in support of clinical vaccine trials

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGICAL METHODS
卷 409, 期 -, 页码 107-116

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jim.2014.04.005

关键词

Peripheral blood mononuclear cells; Cryopreservation; Repository

资金

  1. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1032325]
  2. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1032325] Funding Source: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A large repository of cryopreserved peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) samples was created to provide laboratories testing the specimens from human immunodeficiency virus-1 (HIV-1) vaccine clinical trials the material for assay development, optimization, and validation. One hundred thirty-one PBMC samples were collected using leukapheresis procedure between 2007 and 2013 by the Comprehensive T cell Vaccine Immune Monitoring Consortium core repository. The donors included 83 human immunodeficiency virus-1 (HIV-1) seronegative and 32 HIV-1 seropositive subjects. The samples were extensively characterized for the ability of T cell subsets to respond to recall viral antigens including cytomegalovirus, Epstein-Barr virus, influenza virus, and HIV-1 using Interferon-gamma (IFN-gamma) enzyme linked immunospot (ELISpot) and IFN-gamma/interleukin 2 (IL-2) intracellular cytokine staining (ICS) assays. A subset of samples was evaluated over time to determine the integrity of the cryopreserved samples in relation to recovery, viability, and functionality. The principal results of our study demonstrate that viable and functional cells were consistently recovered from the cryopreserved samples. Therefore, we determined that this repository of large size cryopreserved cellular samples constitutes a unique resource for laboratories that are involved in optimization and validation of assays to evaluate T, B, and NI( cellular functions in the context of clinical trials. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据