Prabhakar Uma, Eirikis Edward, Reddy Manjula, Silvestro Eva, Spitz Susan, Pendley Charles, Davis Hugh M, Miller Bruce E
Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Centocor Inc., 200 Great Valley Parkway, Malvern, PA 19355, USA.
J Immunol Methods. 2004 Aug;291(1-2):27-38. doi: 10.1016/j.jim.2004.04.018.
There is increasing evidence suggesting a relationship between cytokine levels and disease pathogenesis, which has led to interest in analyzing multiple cytokines in biological fluids and culture supernatants for various research and clinical studies. The introduction of methodologies allowing simultaneous measurement of interrelated biomarkers/cytokines has further revolutionized this process. In contrast to tissue culture supernatant, the measurement of cytokines in serum has proven to be difficult to characterize in multiplexed formats because of the presence of large dynamic concentration ranges of proteins and other interfering factors that are present in this matrix. In the present study, we have used the microsphere-based multiplex method to simultaneously quantitate and compare six analytes, encompassing a representation of the Th1/Th2 cytokine panel (interleukin (IL)-2, IL-4, IL-5, interferon-gamma (IFN-gamma), tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), and IL-10), in both serum and culture supernatants from peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). A detailed validation procedure for these determinations is described along with a comparative analysis of the performance of the multiplexed assay in serum and culture supernatant matrices. Our results indicate that precision of the multiplexed assay is comparable in both culture supernatant and serum. However, the accuracy of quantification of cytokines in the serum matrix but not in culture supernatant may be compromised depending upon the cytokine being analyzed. Therefore, one must use caution when interpreting data from such complex matrices. Nevertheless, this assay format is appropriate to profile cytokines in clinical trial samples.
越来越多的证据表明细胞因子水平与疾病发病机制之间存在关联,这引发了人们对于在各种研究和临床研究中分析生物体液和培养上清液中多种细胞因子的兴趣。能够同时测量相关生物标志物/细胞因子的方法的引入,进一步彻底改变了这一过程。与组织培养上清液不同,由于血清中存在蛋白质动态浓度范围大以及其他干扰因素,血清中细胞因子的测量已被证明难以采用多重检测形式进行表征。在本研究中,我们使用基于微球的多重检测方法,同时定量和比较外周血单个核细胞(PBMC)的血清和培养上清液中的六种分析物,这些分析物代表了Th1/Th2细胞因子组(白细胞介素(IL)-2、IL-4、IL-5、干扰素-γ(IFN-γ)、肿瘤坏死因子-α(TNF-α)和IL-10)。本文描述了这些测定的详细验证程序,以及对血清和培养上清液基质中多重检测性能的比较分析。我们的结果表明,多重检测在培养上清液和血清中的精密度相当。然而,血清基质中细胞因子定量的准确性(而非培养上清液中的准确性)可能会因所分析的细胞因子而异。因此,在解释来自此类复杂基质的数据时必须谨慎。尽管如此,这种检测形式适用于分析临床试验样本中的细胞因子。