Background: The Human Cell Differentiation Molecules (HCDM) organizes Human Leukocyte Differentiation Antigen (HLDA) workshops to test and name clusters of antibodies that react with a specific antigen. These cluster of differentiation (CD) markers have provided the scientific community with validated antibody clones, consistent naming of targets and reproducible identification of leukocyte subsets. Still, quantitative CD marker expression profiles and benchmarking of reagents at the single-cell level are currently lacking.
Objective: To develop a flow cytometric procedure for quantitative expression profiling of surface antigens on blood leukocyte subsets that is standardized across multiple research laboratories.
Methods: A high content framework to evaluate the titration and reactivity of Phycoerythrin (PE)-conjugated monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) was created. Two flow cytometry panels were designed: an innate cell tube for granulocytes, dendritic cells, monocytes, NK cells and innate lymphoid cells (12-color) and an adaptive lymphocyte tube for naive and memory B and T cells, including TCRγδ+, regulatory-T and follicular helper T cells (11-color). The potential of these 2 panels was demonstrated via expression profiling of selected CD markers detected by PE-conjugated antibodies and evaluated using 561 nm excitation.
Results: Using automated data annotation and dried backbone reagents, we reached a robust workflow amenable to processing hundreds of measurements in each experiment in a 96-well plate format. The immunophenotyping panels enabled discrimination of 27 leukocyte subsets and quantitative detection of the expression of PE-conjugated CD markers of interest that could quantify protein expression above 400 units of antibody binding capacity. Expression profiling of 4 selected CD markers (CD11b, CD31, CD38, CD40) showed high reproducibility across centers, as well as the capacity to benchmark unique clones directed toward the same CD3 antigen.
Conclusion: We optimized a procedure for quantitative expression profiling of surface antigens on blood leukocyte subsets. The workflow, bioinformatics pipeline and optimized flow panels enable the following: 1) mapping the expression patterns of HLDA-approved mAb clones to CD markers; 2) benchmarking new antibody clones to established CD markers; 3) defining new clusters of differentiation in future HLDA workshops.
Introduction: The morphological patterns in indirect immunofluorescence assay on HEp-2 cells (HEp-2 IFA) reflect the autoantibodies in the sample. The International Consensus on ANA Patterns (ICAP) classifies 30 relevant patterns (AC-0 to AC-29). AC-4 (fine speckled nuclear pattern) is associated to anti-SS-A/Ro, anti-SS-B/La, and several autoantibodies. Anti-SS-A/Ro samples may contain antibodies to Ro60 and Ro52. A variation of AC-4 (herein designated AC-4a), characterized by myriad discrete nuclear speckles, was reported to be associated with anti-SS-A/Ro. The plain fine speckled pattern (herein designated AC-4b) seldom was associated with anti-SS-A/Ro. This study reports the experience of four expert laboratories on AC-4a and AC-4b.
Methods: Anti-Ro60 monoclonal antibody A7 was used to investigate the HEp-2 IFA pattern. Records containing concomitant HEp-2 IFA and SS-A/Ro tests from Durand Laboratory, Argentina (n = 383) and Fleury Laboratory, Brazil (n = 144,471) were analyzed for associations between HEp-2 IFA patterns and disease-associated autoantibodies (DAA): double-stranded DNA, Scl-70, nucleosome, SS-B/La, Sm, and U1-RNP. A total of 381 samples from Dresden Technical University (TU-Dresden), Germany, were assayed for HEp-2 IFA and DAA.
Results: Monoclonal A7 recognized Ro60 in Western blot and immunoprecipitation, and yielded the AC-4a pattern on HEp-2 IFA. Analyses from Durand Laboratory and Fleury Laboratory yielded compatible results: AC-4a was less frequent (8.9% and 2.7%, respectively) than AC-4b (26.1% and 24.2%) in HEp-2 IFA-positive samples. Reactivity to SS-A/Ro occurred in 67.6% and 96.3% of AC-4a-pattern samples against 23% and 6.8% of AC-4b pattern samples. Reciprocally, AC-4a occurred in 24% and 47.1% of anti-SS-A/Ro-positive samples, and in 3.8% and 0.1% of anti-SS-A/Ro-negative samples. Data from TU-Dresden show that the AC-4a pattern occurred in 69% of 169 anti-SS-A/Ro-monospecific samples (62% of all anti-SS-A/Ro-positive samples) and in 4% of anti-SS-A/Ro-negative samples, whereas anti-SS-A/Ro occurred in 98.3% of AC-4a samples and in 47.9% of AC-4b samples. In all laboratories, coexistence of anti-SS-B/La, but not other DAA, in anti-SS-A/Ro-positive samples did not disturb the AC-4a pattern. AC-4a was predominantly associated with anti-Ro60 antibodies.
Conclusions: This study confirms the association of AC-4a pattern and anti-SS-A/Ro in opposition to the AC-4b pattern. The results of four international expert laboratories support the worldwide applicability of these AC-4 pattern variants and their incorporation into ICAP classification under codes AC-4a and AC-4b, respectively. The AC-4 pattern should be maintained as an umbrella pattern for cases in which one cannot discriminate AC-4a and AC-4b patterns. The acknowledgment of the AC-4a pattern should add value to HEp-2 IFA interpretation.
Antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) are mandatory for the diagnosis but are also a risk factor for the antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) clinical manifestations. Lupus anticoagulant (LA), anticardiolipin (aCL), and anti-beta2 glycoprotein I (β2GPI) assays are the formal laboratory classification/diagnostic criteria. Additional nonclassification assays have been suggested; among them, antiphosphatidylserine-prothrombin (aPS/PT) and antidomain 1 β2GPI antibodies are the most promising ones although not yet formally accepted. aPL represent the example of a laboratory test that moved from dichotomous to quantitative results consistent with the idea that reporting quantitative data offers more diagnostic/prognostic information for both vascular and obstetric manifestations. Although the general rule is that the higher the aPL titer, the higher the test likelihood ratio, there is growing evidence that this is not the case for persistent low titers and obstetric events. LA displays the highest diagnostic/prognostic power, although some isolated LAs are apparently not associated with APS manifestations. Moreover, isotype characterization is also critical since IgG aPL are more diagnostic/prognostic than IgA or IgM. aPL are directed against two main autoantigens: β2GPI and PT. However, anti-β2GPI antibodies are more associated with the APS clinical spectrum. In addition, there is evidence that anti-β2GPI domain 1 antibodies display a stronger diagnostic/prognostic value. This finding supports the view that antigen and even epitope characterization represents a further step for improving the assay value. The strategy to improve aPL laboratory characterization is a lesson that can be translated to other autoantibody assays in order to improve our diagnostic and prognostic power.
The topic of standardization in relation to allergen products has been discussed by allergists, regulators, and manufacturers for a long time. In contrast to synthetic medicinal products, the natural origin of allergen products makes the necessary comparability difficult to achieve. This holds true for both aspects of standardization: Batch-to-batch consistency (or product-specific standardization) and comparability among products from different manufacturers (or cross-product comparability). In this review, we focus on how the United States and the European Union have tackled the topic of allergen product standardization in the past, covering the early joint standardization efforts in the 1970s and 1980s as well as the different paths taken by the two players thereafter until today. So far, these two paths have been based on rather classical immunological methods, including the corresponding benefits like simple feasability. New technologies such as mass spectrometry present an opportunity to redefine the field of allergen standardization in the future.
Severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome (SFTS) is a new tick-borne viral disease, and most SFTS virus (SFTSV) infections occur via bites from the tick Haemaphysalis longicornis; however, SFTSV transmission can also occur through close contact with an infected patient. SFTS is characterized by acute high fever, thrombocytopenia, leukopenia, elevated serum hepatic enzyme levels, gastrointestinal symptoms, and multiorgan failure and has a 16.2 to 30% mortality rate. In this study, we found that age, dyspnea rates, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), lactate dehydrogenase, multiorgan dysfunction score (MODS), viral load, IL-6 levels, and IL-10 levels were higher in patients with fatal disease than in patients with nonfatal disease during the initial clinical course of SFTS. In addition, we found that IL-6 and IL-10 levels, rather than viral load and neutralizing antibody titers, in patients with an SFTSV infection strongly correlated with outcomes (for severe disease with an ultimate outcome of recovery or death).
Immunological therapy principles are increasingly determining modern medicine. They are used to treat diseases of the immune system, for tumors, but also for infections, neurological diseases, and many others. Most of these therapies base on antibodies, but small molecules, soluble receptors or cells and modified cells are also used. The development of immune checkpoint inhibitors is amazingly fast. T-cell directed antibody therapies against PD-1 or CTLA-4 are already firmly established in the clinic. Further targets are constantly being added and it is becoming increasingly clear that their expression is not only relevant on T cells. Furthermore, we do not yet have any experience with the long-term systemic effects of the treatment. Flow cytometry can be used for diagnosis, monitoring, and detection of side effects. In this review, we focus on checkpoint molecules as target molecules and functional markers of cells of the innate and acquired immune system. However, for most of the interesting and potentially relevant parameters, there are still no test kits suitable for routine use. Here we give an overview of the detection of checkpoint molecules on immune cells in the peripheral blood and show examples of a possible design of antibody panels.
Measurement of two groups of autoantibodies, rheumatoid factor (RF) and anti-citrullinated protein/peptide antibodies (ACPA) have gained increasing significance in the diagnosis and classification of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) over the last 65 years. Despite this rising importance of autoimmune serology in RA, there is a palpable lack of harmonization between different commercial RF and ACPA tests. While a minimal diagnostic specificity has been defined for RF tests, which almost always are related to an international reference preparation, neither of this applies to ACPA. Especially assays with low diagnostic specificity are associated with very low positive predictive values or post-test probabilities in real world settings. In this review we focus on issues of practical bearing for the clinical physician diagnosing patients who potentially have RA, or treating patients diagnosed with RA. We advocate that all clinically used assays for RF and ACPA should be aligned to a common diagnostic specificity of 98-99% compared to healthy controls. This high and rather narrow interval corresponds to the diagnostic specificity seen for many commercial ACPA tests, and represents a specificity that is higher than what is customary for most RF assays. Data on antibody occurrence harmonized in this way should be accompanied by test result-specific likelihood ratios for the target diagnosis RA on an ordinal or interval scale, which will provide the clinical physician with more granular and richer information than merely relating numerical values to a single cut-off point. As many physicians today are used to evaluate autoantibodies as positive or negative on a nominal scale, the introduction of test result-specific likelihood ratios will require a change in clinical mindset. We also discuss the use of autoantibodies to prognosticate future arthritis development in at-risk patients as well as predict severe disease course and outcome of pharmacological treatment.