Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Strategies for enumeration of circulating microvesicles on a conventional flow cytometer: Counting beads and scatter parameters.||Austin Authors:||Alkhatatbeh, Mohammad J;Enjeti, Anoop K;Baqar, Sara;Ekinci, Elif I ;Liu, Dorothy ;Thorne, Rick F;Lincz, Lisa F||Affiliation:||Haematology Unit, Calvary Mater Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia
Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, New South Wales, Australia
Faculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia
Pathology North Hunter, NSW Health Pathology, New South Wales, Australia
Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid, Jordan.
Department of Endocrinology, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia
Department of Medicine, Austin Health, The University of Melbourne, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia
|Issue Date:||5-Apr-2018||metadata.dc.date:||2018-04-05||Publication information:||Journal of circulating biomarkers 2018; online first: 5 April||Abstract:||Enumeration of circulating microvesicles (MVs) by conventional flow cytometry is accomplished by the addition of a known amount of counting beads and calculated from the formula: MV/μl = (MV count/bead count) × final bead concentration. We sought to optimize each variable in the equation by determining the best parameters for detecting 'MV count' and examining the effects of different bead preparations and concentrations on the final calculation. Three commercially available bead preparations (TruCount, Flow-Count and CountBright) were tested, and MV detection on a BD FACSCanto was optimized for gating by either forward scatter (FSC) or side scatter (SSC); the results were compared by calculating different subsets of MV on a series of 74 typical patient plasma samples. The relationship between the number of beads added to each test and the number of beads counted by flow cytometry remained linear over a wide range of bead concentrations (R2 ≥ 0.997). However, TruCount beads produced the most consistent (concentration variation = 3.8%) calculated numbers of plasma CD41+/Annexin V+ MV, which were significantly higher from that calculated using either Flow-Count or CountBright (p < 0.001). The FACSCanto was able to resolve 0.5 μm beads by FSC and 0.16 μm beads by SSC, but there were significantly more background events using SSC compared with FSC (3113 vs. 470; p = 0.008). In general, sample analysis by SSC resulted in significantly higher numbers of MV (p < 0.0001) but was well correlated with enumeration by FSC for all MV subtypes (ρ = 0.62-0.89, p < 0.0001). We conclude that all counting beads provided linear results at concentrations ranging from 6 beads/μl to 100 beads/μl, but TruCount was the most consistent. Using SSC to gate MV events produced high background which negatively affected counting bead enumeration and overall MV calculations. Strategies to reduce SSC background should be employed in order to reliably use this technique.||URI:||http://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/17488||DOI:||10.1177/1849454418766966||ORCID:||0000-0002-1612-2382
|PubMed URL:||29662552||Type:||Journal Article||Subjects:||Flow cytometry
|Appears in Collections:||Journal articles|
Show full item record
Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.