Improved Standardization of Flow Cytometry Diagnostic Screening of Primary Immunodeficiency by Software-Based Automated Gating

BackgroundMultiparameter flow cytometry (FC) is essential in the diagnostic work-up and classification of primary immunodeficiency (PIDs). The EuroFlow PID Orientation tube (PIDOT) allows identification of all main lymphocyte subpopulations in blood. To standardize data analysis, tools for Automated Gating and Identification (AG&I) of the informative cell populations, were developed by EuroFlow. Here, we evaluated the contribution of these innovative AG&I tools to the standardization of FC in the diagnostic work-up of PID, by comparing AG&I against expert-based (EuroFlow-standardized) Manual Gating (MG) strategy, and its impact on the reproducibility and clinical interpretation of results.MethodsFC data files from 44 patients (13 CVID, 12 PID, 19 non-PID) and 26 healthy donor (HD) blood samples stained with PIDOT were analyzed in parallel by MG and AG&I, using Infinicyt™ software (Cytognos). For comparison, percentage differences in absolute cell counts/µL were calculated for each lymphocyte subpopulation. Data files showing differences >20% were checked for their potential clinical relevance, based on age-matched percentile (p5-p95) reference ranges. In parallel, intra- and inter-observer reproducibility of MG vs AG&I were evaluated in a subset of 12 samples.ResultsThe AG&I approach was able to identify the vast majority of lymphoid events (>99%), associated with a significantly higher intra- and inter-observer reproducibility compared to MG. For most HD (83%) and patient (68%) samples, a high degree of agreement (<20% numerical differences in absolute cell counts/µL) was obtained between MG and the AG&I module. This translated into a minimal impact (<5% of observations) on the final clinical interpretation. In all except three samples, extended expert revision of the AG&I approach revealed no error. In the three remaining samples aberrant maturation and/or abnormal marker expression profiles were seen leading in all three cases to numerical alarms by AG&I.ConclusionAltogether, our results indicate that replacement of MG by the AG&I module would be associated with a greater reproducibility and robustness of results in the diagnostic work-up of patients suspected of PID. However, expert revision of the results of AG&I of PIDOT data still remains necessary in samples with numerical alterations and aberrant B- and T-cell maturation and/or marker expression profiles. Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Eleni Linskens [verfasserIn] Annieck M. Diks [verfasserIn] Jana Neirinck [verfasserIn] Martín Perez-Andres [verfasserIn] Emilie De Maertelaere [verfasserIn] Magdalena A. Berkowska [verfasserIn] Tessa Kerre [verfasserIn] Mattias Hofmans [verfasserIn] Alberto Orfao [verfasserIn] Jacques J. M. van Dongen [verfasserIn] Filomeen Haerynck [verfasserIn] Jan Philippé [verfasserIn] Carolien Bonroy [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2020

Schlagwörter:	flow cytometry immunophenotyping primary immunodeficiencies automated gating standardization EuroFlow

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: Frontiers in Immunology - Frontiers Media S.A., 2011, 11(2020)
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:11 ; year:2020

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc

DOI / URN:	10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ051530562

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ051530562
003	DE-627
005	20230308161815.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230227s2020 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ051530562
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJffa5fd68136e4a5c92cb0cb572faeace
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
050		0	\|a RC581-607
100	0		\|a Eleni Linskens \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Improved Standardization of Flow Cytometry Diagnostic Screening of Primary Immunodeficiency by Software-Based Automated Gating
264		1	\|c 2020
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a BackgroundMultiparameter flow cytometry (FC) is essential in the diagnostic work-up and classification of primary immunodeficiency (PIDs). The EuroFlow PID Orientation tube (PIDOT) allows identification of all main lymphocyte subpopulations in blood. To standardize data analysis, tools for Automated Gating and Identification (AG&I) of the informative cell populations, were developed by EuroFlow. Here, we evaluated the contribution of these innovative AG&I tools to the standardization of FC in the diagnostic work-up of PID, by comparing AG&I against expert-based (EuroFlow-standardized) Manual Gating (MG) strategy, and its impact on the reproducibility and clinical interpretation of results.MethodsFC data files from 44 patients (13 CVID, 12 PID, 19 non-PID) and 26 healthy donor (HD) blood samples stained with PIDOT were analyzed in parallel by MG and AG&I, using Infinicyt™ software (Cytognos). For comparison, percentage differences in absolute cell counts/µL were calculated for each lymphocyte subpopulation. Data files showing differences >20% were checked for their potential clinical relevance, based on age-matched percentile (p5-p95) reference ranges. In parallel, intra- and inter-observer reproducibility of MG vs AG&I were evaluated in a subset of 12 samples.ResultsThe AG&I approach was able to identify the vast majority of lymphoid events (>99%), associated with a significantly higher intra- and inter-observer reproducibility compared to MG. For most HD (83%) and patient (68%) samples, a high degree of agreement (<20% numerical differences in absolute cell counts/µL) was obtained between MG and the AG&I module. This translated into a minimal impact (<5% of observations) on the final clinical interpretation. In all except three samples, extended expert revision of the AG&I approach revealed no error. In the three remaining samples aberrant maturation and/or abnormal marker expression profiles were seen leading in all three cases to numerical alarms by AG&I.ConclusionAltogether, our results indicate that replacement of MG by the AG&I module would be associated with a greater reproducibility and robustness of results in the diagnostic work-up of patients suspected of PID. However, expert revision of the results of AG&I of PIDOT data still remains necessary in samples with numerical alterations and aberrant B- and T-cell maturation and/or marker expression profiles.
650		4	\|a flow cytometry
650		4	\|a immunophenotyping
650		4	\|a primary immunodeficiencies
650		4	\|a automated gating
650		4	\|a standardization
650		4	\|a EuroFlow
653		0	\|a Immunologic diseases. Allergy
700	0		\|a Annieck M. Diks \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Jana Neirinck \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Martín Perez-Andres \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Martín Perez-Andres \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Emilie De Maertelaere \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Magdalena A. Berkowska \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Tessa Kerre \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Mattias Hofmans \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Alberto Orfao \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Alberto Orfao \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Jacques J. M. van Dongen \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Filomeen Haerynck \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Jan Philippé \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Jan Philippé \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Carolien Bonroy \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Carolien Bonroy \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i In \|t Frontiers in Immunology \|d Frontiers Media S.A., 2011 \|g 11(2020) \|w (DE-627)657998354 \|w (DE-600)2606827-8 \|x 16643224 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:11 \|g year:2020
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/ffa5fd68136e4a5c92cb0cb572faeace \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646/full \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/1664-3224 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2003
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 11 \|j 2020

Indexfelder

author_variant	e l el a m d amd j n jn m p a mpa m p a mpa e d m edm m a b mab t k tk m h mh a o ao a o ao j j m v d jjmvd f h fh j p jp j p jp c b cb c b cb
matchkey_str	article:16643224:2020----::mrvdtnadztoofoctmtyigotccennopiaymuoeiinyy
hierarchy_sort_str	2020
callnumber-subject-code	RC
publishDate	2020
allfields	10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646 doi (DE-627)DOAJ051530562 (DE-599)DOAJffa5fd68136e4a5c92cb0cb572faeace DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RC581-607 Eleni Linskens verfasserin aut Improved Standardization of Flow Cytometry Diagnostic Screening of Primary Immunodeficiency by Software-Based Automated Gating 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier BackgroundMultiparameter flow cytometry (FC) is essential in the diagnostic work-up and classification of primary immunodeficiency (PIDs). The EuroFlow PID Orientation tube (PIDOT) allows identification of all main lymphocyte subpopulations in blood. To standardize data analysis, tools for Automated Gating and Identification (AG&I) of the informative cell populations, were developed by EuroFlow. Here, we evaluated the contribution of these innovative AG&I tools to the standardization of FC in the diagnostic work-up of PID, by comparing AG&I against expert-based (EuroFlow-standardized) Manual Gating (MG) strategy, and its impact on the reproducibility and clinical interpretation of results.MethodsFC data files from 44 patients (13 CVID, 12 PID, 19 non-PID) and 26 healthy donor (HD) blood samples stained with PIDOT were analyzed in parallel by MG and AG&I, using Infinicyt™ software (Cytognos). For comparison, percentage differences in absolute cell counts/µL were calculated for each lymphocyte subpopulation. Data files showing differences >20% were checked for their potential clinical relevance, based on age-matched percentile (p5-p95) reference ranges. In parallel, intra- and inter-observer reproducibility of MG vs AG&I were evaluated in a subset of 12 samples.ResultsThe AG&I approach was able to identify the vast majority of lymphoid events (>99%), associated with a significantly higher intra- and inter-observer reproducibility compared to MG. For most HD (83%) and patient (68%) samples, a high degree of agreement (<20% numerical differences in absolute cell counts/µL) was obtained between MG and the AG&I module. This translated into a minimal impact (<5% of observations) on the final clinical interpretation. In all except three samples, extended expert revision of the AG&I approach revealed no error. In the three remaining samples aberrant maturation and/or abnormal marker expression profiles were seen leading in all three cases to numerical alarms by AG&I.ConclusionAltogether, our results indicate that replacement of MG by the AG&I module would be associated with a greater reproducibility and robustness of results in the diagnostic work-up of patients suspected of PID. However, expert revision of the results of AG&I of PIDOT data still remains necessary in samples with numerical alterations and aberrant B- and T-cell maturation and/or marker expression profiles. flow cytometry immunophenotyping primary immunodeficiencies automated gating standardization EuroFlow Immunologic diseases. Allergy Annieck M. Diks verfasserin aut Jana Neirinck verfasserin aut Martín Perez-Andres verfasserin aut Martín Perez-Andres verfasserin aut Emilie De Maertelaere verfasserin aut Magdalena A. Berkowska verfasserin aut Tessa Kerre verfasserin aut Mattias Hofmans verfasserin aut Alberto Orfao verfasserin aut Alberto Orfao verfasserin aut Jacques J. M. van Dongen verfasserin aut Filomeen Haerynck verfasserin aut Jan Philippé verfasserin aut Jan Philippé verfasserin aut Carolien Bonroy verfasserin aut Carolien Bonroy verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Immunology Frontiers Media S.A., 2011 11(2020) (DE-627)657998354 (DE-600)2606827-8 16643224 nnns volume:11 year:2020 https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/ffa5fd68136e4a5c92cb0cb572faeace kostenfrei https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-3224 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 11 2020
spelling	10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646 doi (DE-627)DOAJ051530562 (DE-599)DOAJffa5fd68136e4a5c92cb0cb572faeace DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RC581-607 Eleni Linskens verfasserin aut Improved Standardization of Flow Cytometry Diagnostic Screening of Primary Immunodeficiency by Software-Based Automated Gating 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier BackgroundMultiparameter flow cytometry (FC) is essential in the diagnostic work-up and classification of primary immunodeficiency (PIDs). The EuroFlow PID Orientation tube (PIDOT) allows identification of all main lymphocyte subpopulations in blood. To standardize data analysis, tools for Automated Gating and Identification (AG&I) of the informative cell populations, were developed by EuroFlow. Here, we evaluated the contribution of these innovative AG&I tools to the standardization of FC in the diagnostic work-up of PID, by comparing AG&I against expert-based (EuroFlow-standardized) Manual Gating (MG) strategy, and its impact on the reproducibility and clinical interpretation of results.MethodsFC data files from 44 patients (13 CVID, 12 PID, 19 non-PID) and 26 healthy donor (HD) blood samples stained with PIDOT were analyzed in parallel by MG and AG&I, using Infinicyt™ software (Cytognos). For comparison, percentage differences in absolute cell counts/µL were calculated for each lymphocyte subpopulation. Data files showing differences >20% were checked for their potential clinical relevance, based on age-matched percentile (p5-p95) reference ranges. In parallel, intra- and inter-observer reproducibility of MG vs AG&I were evaluated in a subset of 12 samples.ResultsThe AG&I approach was able to identify the vast majority of lymphoid events (>99%), associated with a significantly higher intra- and inter-observer reproducibility compared to MG. For most HD (83%) and patient (68%) samples, a high degree of agreement (<20% numerical differences in absolute cell counts/µL) was obtained between MG and the AG&I module. This translated into a minimal impact (<5% of observations) on the final clinical interpretation. In all except three samples, extended expert revision of the AG&I approach revealed no error. In the three remaining samples aberrant maturation and/or abnormal marker expression profiles were seen leading in all three cases to numerical alarms by AG&I.ConclusionAltogether, our results indicate that replacement of MG by the AG&I module would be associated with a greater reproducibility and robustness of results in the diagnostic work-up of patients suspected of PID. However, expert revision of the results of AG&I of PIDOT data still remains necessary in samples with numerical alterations and aberrant B- and T-cell maturation and/or marker expression profiles. flow cytometry immunophenotyping primary immunodeficiencies automated gating standardization EuroFlow Immunologic diseases. Allergy Annieck M. Diks verfasserin aut Jana Neirinck verfasserin aut Martín Perez-Andres verfasserin aut Martín Perez-Andres verfasserin aut Emilie De Maertelaere verfasserin aut Magdalena A. Berkowska verfasserin aut Tessa Kerre verfasserin aut Mattias Hofmans verfasserin aut Alberto Orfao verfasserin aut Alberto Orfao verfasserin aut Jacques J. M. van Dongen verfasserin aut Filomeen Haerynck verfasserin aut Jan Philippé verfasserin aut Jan Philippé verfasserin aut Carolien Bonroy verfasserin aut Carolien Bonroy verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Immunology Frontiers Media S.A., 2011 11(2020) (DE-627)657998354 (DE-600)2606827-8 16643224 nnns volume:11 year:2020 https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/ffa5fd68136e4a5c92cb0cb572faeace kostenfrei https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-3224 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 11 2020
allfields_unstemmed	10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646 doi (DE-627)DOAJ051530562 (DE-599)DOAJffa5fd68136e4a5c92cb0cb572faeace DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RC581-607 Eleni Linskens verfasserin aut Improved Standardization of Flow Cytometry Diagnostic Screening of Primary Immunodeficiency by Software-Based Automated Gating 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier BackgroundMultiparameter flow cytometry (FC) is essential in the diagnostic work-up and classification of primary immunodeficiency (PIDs). The EuroFlow PID Orientation tube (PIDOT) allows identification of all main lymphocyte subpopulations in blood. To standardize data analysis, tools for Automated Gating and Identification (AG&I) of the informative cell populations, were developed by EuroFlow. Here, we evaluated the contribution of these innovative AG&I tools to the standardization of FC in the diagnostic work-up of PID, by comparing AG&I against expert-based (EuroFlow-standardized) Manual Gating (MG) strategy, and its impact on the reproducibility and clinical interpretation of results.MethodsFC data files from 44 patients (13 CVID, 12 PID, 19 non-PID) and 26 healthy donor (HD) blood samples stained with PIDOT were analyzed in parallel by MG and AG&I, using Infinicyt™ software (Cytognos). For comparison, percentage differences in absolute cell counts/µL were calculated for each lymphocyte subpopulation. Data files showing differences >20% were checked for their potential clinical relevance, based on age-matched percentile (p5-p95) reference ranges. In parallel, intra- and inter-observer reproducibility of MG vs AG&I were evaluated in a subset of 12 samples.ResultsThe AG&I approach was able to identify the vast majority of lymphoid events (>99%), associated with a significantly higher intra- and inter-observer reproducibility compared to MG. For most HD (83%) and patient (68%) samples, a high degree of agreement (<20% numerical differences in absolute cell counts/µL) was obtained between MG and the AG&I module. This translated into a minimal impact (<5% of observations) on the final clinical interpretation. In all except three samples, extended expert revision of the AG&I approach revealed no error. In the three remaining samples aberrant maturation and/or abnormal marker expression profiles were seen leading in all three cases to numerical alarms by AG&I.ConclusionAltogether, our results indicate that replacement of MG by the AG&I module would be associated with a greater reproducibility and robustness of results in the diagnostic work-up of patients suspected of PID. However, expert revision of the results of AG&I of PIDOT data still remains necessary in samples with numerical alterations and aberrant B- and T-cell maturation and/or marker expression profiles. flow cytometry immunophenotyping primary immunodeficiencies automated gating standardization EuroFlow Immunologic diseases. Allergy Annieck M. Diks verfasserin aut Jana Neirinck verfasserin aut Martín Perez-Andres verfasserin aut Martín Perez-Andres verfasserin aut Emilie De Maertelaere verfasserin aut Magdalena A. Berkowska verfasserin aut Tessa Kerre verfasserin aut Mattias Hofmans verfasserin aut Alberto Orfao verfasserin aut Alberto Orfao verfasserin aut Jacques J. M. van Dongen verfasserin aut Filomeen Haerynck verfasserin aut Jan Philippé verfasserin aut Jan Philippé verfasserin aut Carolien Bonroy verfasserin aut Carolien Bonroy verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Immunology Frontiers Media S.A., 2011 11(2020) (DE-627)657998354 (DE-600)2606827-8 16643224 nnns volume:11 year:2020 https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/ffa5fd68136e4a5c92cb0cb572faeace kostenfrei https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-3224 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 11 2020
allfieldsGer	10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646 doi (DE-627)DOAJ051530562 (DE-599)DOAJffa5fd68136e4a5c92cb0cb572faeace DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RC581-607 Eleni Linskens verfasserin aut Improved Standardization of Flow Cytometry Diagnostic Screening of Primary Immunodeficiency by Software-Based Automated Gating 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier BackgroundMultiparameter flow cytometry (FC) is essential in the diagnostic work-up and classification of primary immunodeficiency (PIDs). The EuroFlow PID Orientation tube (PIDOT) allows identification of all main lymphocyte subpopulations in blood. To standardize data analysis, tools for Automated Gating and Identification (AG&I) of the informative cell populations, were developed by EuroFlow. Here, we evaluated the contribution of these innovative AG&I tools to the standardization of FC in the diagnostic work-up of PID, by comparing AG&I against expert-based (EuroFlow-standardized) Manual Gating (MG) strategy, and its impact on the reproducibility and clinical interpretation of results.MethodsFC data files from 44 patients (13 CVID, 12 PID, 19 non-PID) and 26 healthy donor (HD) blood samples stained with PIDOT were analyzed in parallel by MG and AG&I, using Infinicyt™ software (Cytognos). For comparison, percentage differences in absolute cell counts/µL were calculated for each lymphocyte subpopulation. Data files showing differences >20% were checked for their potential clinical relevance, based on age-matched percentile (p5-p95) reference ranges. In parallel, intra- and inter-observer reproducibility of MG vs AG&I were evaluated in a subset of 12 samples.ResultsThe AG&I approach was able to identify the vast majority of lymphoid events (>99%), associated with a significantly higher intra- and inter-observer reproducibility compared to MG. For most HD (83%) and patient (68%) samples, a high degree of agreement (<20% numerical differences in absolute cell counts/µL) was obtained between MG and the AG&I module. This translated into a minimal impact (<5% of observations) on the final clinical interpretation. In all except three samples, extended expert revision of the AG&I approach revealed no error. In the three remaining samples aberrant maturation and/or abnormal marker expression profiles were seen leading in all three cases to numerical alarms by AG&I.ConclusionAltogether, our results indicate that replacement of MG by the AG&I module would be associated with a greater reproducibility and robustness of results in the diagnostic work-up of patients suspected of PID. However, expert revision of the results of AG&I of PIDOT data still remains necessary in samples with numerical alterations and aberrant B- and T-cell maturation and/or marker expression profiles. flow cytometry immunophenotyping primary immunodeficiencies automated gating standardization EuroFlow Immunologic diseases. Allergy Annieck M. Diks verfasserin aut Jana Neirinck verfasserin aut Martín Perez-Andres verfasserin aut Martín Perez-Andres verfasserin aut Emilie De Maertelaere verfasserin aut Magdalena A. Berkowska verfasserin aut Tessa Kerre verfasserin aut Mattias Hofmans verfasserin aut Alberto Orfao verfasserin aut Alberto Orfao verfasserin aut Jacques J. M. van Dongen verfasserin aut Filomeen Haerynck verfasserin aut Jan Philippé verfasserin aut Jan Philippé verfasserin aut Carolien Bonroy verfasserin aut Carolien Bonroy verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Immunology Frontiers Media S.A., 2011 11(2020) (DE-627)657998354 (DE-600)2606827-8 16643224 nnns volume:11 year:2020 https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/ffa5fd68136e4a5c92cb0cb572faeace kostenfrei https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-3224 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 11 2020
allfieldsSound	10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646 doi (DE-627)DOAJ051530562 (DE-599)DOAJffa5fd68136e4a5c92cb0cb572faeace DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RC581-607 Eleni Linskens verfasserin aut Improved Standardization of Flow Cytometry Diagnostic Screening of Primary Immunodeficiency by Software-Based Automated Gating 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier BackgroundMultiparameter flow cytometry (FC) is essential in the diagnostic work-up and classification of primary immunodeficiency (PIDs). The EuroFlow PID Orientation tube (PIDOT) allows identification of all main lymphocyte subpopulations in blood. To standardize data analysis, tools for Automated Gating and Identification (AG&I) of the informative cell populations, were developed by EuroFlow. Here, we evaluated the contribution of these innovative AG&I tools to the standardization of FC in the diagnostic work-up of PID, by comparing AG&I against expert-based (EuroFlow-standardized) Manual Gating (MG) strategy, and its impact on the reproducibility and clinical interpretation of results.MethodsFC data files from 44 patients (13 CVID, 12 PID, 19 non-PID) and 26 healthy donor (HD) blood samples stained with PIDOT were analyzed in parallel by MG and AG&I, using Infinicyt™ software (Cytognos). For comparison, percentage differences in absolute cell counts/µL were calculated for each lymphocyte subpopulation. Data files showing differences >20% were checked for their potential clinical relevance, based on age-matched percentile (p5-p95) reference ranges. In parallel, intra- and inter-observer reproducibility of MG vs AG&I were evaluated in a subset of 12 samples.ResultsThe AG&I approach was able to identify the vast majority of lymphoid events (>99%), associated with a significantly higher intra- and inter-observer reproducibility compared to MG. For most HD (83%) and patient (68%) samples, a high degree of agreement (<20% numerical differences in absolute cell counts/µL) was obtained between MG and the AG&I module. This translated into a minimal impact (<5% of observations) on the final clinical interpretation. In all except three samples, extended expert revision of the AG&I approach revealed no error. In the three remaining samples aberrant maturation and/or abnormal marker expression profiles were seen leading in all three cases to numerical alarms by AG&I.ConclusionAltogether, our results indicate that replacement of MG by the AG&I module would be associated with a greater reproducibility and robustness of results in the diagnostic work-up of patients suspected of PID. However, expert revision of the results of AG&I of PIDOT data still remains necessary in samples with numerical alterations and aberrant B- and T-cell maturation and/or marker expression profiles. flow cytometry immunophenotyping primary immunodeficiencies automated gating standardization EuroFlow Immunologic diseases. Allergy Annieck M. Diks verfasserin aut Jana Neirinck verfasserin aut Martín Perez-Andres verfasserin aut Martín Perez-Andres verfasserin aut Emilie De Maertelaere verfasserin aut Magdalena A. Berkowska verfasserin aut Tessa Kerre verfasserin aut Mattias Hofmans verfasserin aut Alberto Orfao verfasserin aut Alberto Orfao verfasserin aut Jacques J. M. van Dongen verfasserin aut Filomeen Haerynck verfasserin aut Jan Philippé verfasserin aut Jan Philippé verfasserin aut Carolien Bonroy verfasserin aut Carolien Bonroy verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Immunology Frontiers Media S.A., 2011 11(2020) (DE-627)657998354 (DE-600)2606827-8 16643224 nnns volume:11 year:2020 https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/ffa5fd68136e4a5c92cb0cb572faeace kostenfrei https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-3224 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 11 2020
language	English
source	In Frontiers in Immunology 11(2020) volume:11 year:2020
sourceStr	In Frontiers in Immunology 11(2020) volume:11 year:2020
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	flow cytometry immunophenotyping primary immunodeficiencies automated gating standardization EuroFlow Immunologic diseases. Allergy
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	Frontiers in Immunology
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Eleni Linskens @@aut@@ Annieck M. Diks @@aut@@ Jana Neirinck @@aut@@ Martín Perez-Andres @@aut@@ Emilie De Maertelaere @@aut@@ Magdalena A. Berkowska @@aut@@ Tessa Kerre @@aut@@ Mattias Hofmans @@aut@@ Alberto Orfao @@aut@@ Jacques J. M. van Dongen @@aut@@ Filomeen Haerynck @@aut@@ Jan Philippé @@aut@@ Carolien Bonroy @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2020-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	657998354
id	DOAJ051530562
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ051530562</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230308161815.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230227s2020 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ051530562</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJffa5fd68136e4a5c92cb0cb572faeace</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RC581-607</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Eleni Linskens</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Improved Standardization of Flow Cytometry Diagnostic Screening of Primary Immunodeficiency by Software-Based Automated Gating</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">BackgroundMultiparameter flow cytometry (FC) is essential in the diagnostic work-up and classification of primary immunodeficiency (PIDs). The EuroFlow PID Orientation tube (PIDOT) allows identification of all main lymphocyte subpopulations in blood. To standardize data analysis, tools for Automated Gating and Identification (AG&I) of the informative cell populations, were developed by EuroFlow. Here, we evaluated the contribution of these innovative AG&I tools to the standardization of FC in the diagnostic work-up of PID, by comparing AG&I against expert-based (EuroFlow-standardized) Manual Gating (MG) strategy, and its impact on the reproducibility and clinical interpretation of results.MethodsFC data files from 44 patients (13 CVID, 12 PID, 19 non-PID) and 26 healthy donor (HD) blood samples stained with PIDOT were analyzed in parallel by MG and AG&I, using Infinicyt™ software (Cytognos). For comparison, percentage differences in absolute cell counts/µL were calculated for each lymphocyte subpopulation. Data files showing differences &gt;20% were checked for their potential clinical relevance, based on age-matched percentile (p5-p95) reference ranges. In parallel, intra- and inter-observer reproducibility of MG vs AG&I were evaluated in a subset of 12 samples.ResultsThe AG&I approach was able to identify the vast majority of lymphoid events (&gt;99%), associated with a significantly higher intra- and inter-observer reproducibility compared to MG. For most HD (83%) and patient (68%) samples, a high degree of agreement (&lt;20% numerical differences in absolute cell counts/µL) was obtained between MG and the AG&I module. This translated into a minimal impact (&lt;5% of observations) on the final clinical interpretation. In all except three samples, extended expert revision of the AG&I approach revealed no error. In the three remaining samples aberrant maturation and/or abnormal marker expression profiles were seen leading in all three cases to numerical alarms by AG&I.ConclusionAltogether, our results indicate that replacement of MG by the AG&I module would be associated with a greater reproducibility and robustness of results in the diagnostic work-up of patients suspected of PID. However, expert revision of the results of AG&I of PIDOT data still remains necessary in samples with numerical alterations and aberrant B- and T-cell maturation and/or marker expression profiles.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">flow cytometry</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">immunophenotyping</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">primary immunodeficiencies</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">automated gating</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">standardization</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">EuroFlow</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Immunologic diseases. Allergy</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Annieck M. Diks</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jana Neirinck</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Martín Perez-Andres</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Martín Perez-Andres</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Emilie De Maertelaere</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Magdalena A. Berkowska</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Tessa Kerre</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Mattias Hofmans</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Alberto Orfao</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Alberto Orfao</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jacques J. M. van Dongen</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Filomeen Haerynck</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jan Philippé</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jan Philippé</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Carolien Bonroy</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Carolien Bonroy</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Frontiers in Immunology</subfield><subfield code="d">Frontiers Media S.A., 2011</subfield><subfield code="g">11(2020)</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)657998354</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2606827-8</subfield><subfield code="x">16643224</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:11</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/ffa5fd68136e4a5c92cb0cb572faeace</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646/full</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1664-3224</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">11</subfield><subfield code="j">2020</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
callnumber-first	R - Medicine
author	Eleni Linskens
spellingShingle	Eleni Linskens misc RC581-607 misc flow cytometry misc immunophenotyping misc primary immunodeficiencies misc automated gating misc standardization misc EuroFlow misc Immunologic diseases. Allergy Improved Standardization of Flow Cytometry Diagnostic Screening of Primary Immunodeficiency by Software-Based Automated Gating
authorStr	Eleni Linskens
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)657998354
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
callnumber-label	RC581-607
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	16643224
topic_title	RC581-607 Improved Standardization of Flow Cytometry Diagnostic Screening of Primary Immunodeficiency by Software-Based Automated Gating flow cytometry immunophenotyping primary immunodeficiencies automated gating standardization EuroFlow
topic	misc RC581-607 misc flow cytometry misc immunophenotyping misc primary immunodeficiencies misc automated gating misc standardization misc EuroFlow misc Immunologic diseases. Allergy
topic_unstemmed	misc RC581-607 misc flow cytometry misc immunophenotyping misc primary immunodeficiencies misc automated gating misc standardization misc EuroFlow misc Immunologic diseases. Allergy
topic_browse	misc RC581-607 misc flow cytometry misc immunophenotyping misc primary immunodeficiencies misc automated gating misc standardization misc EuroFlow misc Immunologic diseases. Allergy
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	Frontiers in Immunology
hierarchy_parent_id	657998354
hierarchy_top_title	Frontiers in Immunology
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)657998354 (DE-600)2606827-8
title	Improved Standardization of Flow Cytometry Diagnostic Screening of Primary Immunodeficiency by Software-Based Automated Gating
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ051530562 (DE-599)DOAJffa5fd68136e4a5c92cb0cb572faeace
title_full	Improved Standardization of Flow Cytometry Diagnostic Screening of Primary Immunodeficiency by Software-Based Automated Gating
author_sort	Eleni Linskens
journal	Frontiers in Immunology
journalStr	Frontiers in Immunology
callnumber-first-code	R
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2020
contenttype_str_mv	txt
author_browse	Eleni Linskens Annieck M. Diks Jana Neirinck Martín Perez-Andres Emilie De Maertelaere Magdalena A. Berkowska Tessa Kerre Mattias Hofmans Alberto Orfao Jacques J. M. van Dongen Filomeen Haerynck Jan Philippé Carolien Bonroy
container_volume	11
class	RC581-607
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Eleni Linskens
doi_str_mv	10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	improved standardization of flow cytometry diagnostic screening of primary immunodeficiency by software-based automated gating
callnumber	RC581-607
title_auth	Improved Standardization of Flow Cytometry Diagnostic Screening of Primary Immunodeficiency by Software-Based Automated Gating
abstract	BackgroundMultiparameter flow cytometry (FC) is essential in the diagnostic work-up and classification of primary immunodeficiency (PIDs). The EuroFlow PID Orientation tube (PIDOT) allows identification of all main lymphocyte subpopulations in blood. To standardize data analysis, tools for Automated Gating and Identification (AG&I) of the informative cell populations, were developed by EuroFlow. Here, we evaluated the contribution of these innovative AG&I tools to the standardization of FC in the diagnostic work-up of PID, by comparing AG&I against expert-based (EuroFlow-standardized) Manual Gating (MG) strategy, and its impact on the reproducibility and clinical interpretation of results.MethodsFC data files from 44 patients (13 CVID, 12 PID, 19 non-PID) and 26 healthy donor (HD) blood samples stained with PIDOT were analyzed in parallel by MG and AG&I, using Infinicyt™ software (Cytognos). For comparison, percentage differences in absolute cell counts/µL were calculated for each lymphocyte subpopulation. Data files showing differences >20% were checked for their potential clinical relevance, based on age-matched percentile (p5-p95) reference ranges. In parallel, intra- and inter-observer reproducibility of MG vs AG&I were evaluated in a subset of 12 samples.ResultsThe AG&I approach was able to identify the vast majority of lymphoid events (>99%), associated with a significantly higher intra- and inter-observer reproducibility compared to MG. For most HD (83%) and patient (68%) samples, a high degree of agreement (<20% numerical differences in absolute cell counts/µL) was obtained between MG and the AG&I module. This translated into a minimal impact (<5% of observations) on the final clinical interpretation. In all except three samples, extended expert revision of the AG&I approach revealed no error. In the three remaining samples aberrant maturation and/or abnormal marker expression profiles were seen leading in all three cases to numerical alarms by AG&I.ConclusionAltogether, our results indicate that replacement of MG by the AG&I module would be associated with a greater reproducibility and robustness of results in the diagnostic work-up of patients suspected of PID. However, expert revision of the results of AG&I of PIDOT data still remains necessary in samples with numerical alterations and aberrant B- and T-cell maturation and/or marker expression profiles.
abstractGer	BackgroundMultiparameter flow cytometry (FC) is essential in the diagnostic work-up and classification of primary immunodeficiency (PIDs). The EuroFlow PID Orientation tube (PIDOT) allows identification of all main lymphocyte subpopulations in blood. To standardize data analysis, tools for Automated Gating and Identification (AG&I) of the informative cell populations, were developed by EuroFlow. Here, we evaluated the contribution of these innovative AG&I tools to the standardization of FC in the diagnostic work-up of PID, by comparing AG&I against expert-based (EuroFlow-standardized) Manual Gating (MG) strategy, and its impact on the reproducibility and clinical interpretation of results.MethodsFC data files from 44 patients (13 CVID, 12 PID, 19 non-PID) and 26 healthy donor (HD) blood samples stained with PIDOT were analyzed in parallel by MG and AG&I, using Infinicyt™ software (Cytognos). For comparison, percentage differences in absolute cell counts/µL were calculated for each lymphocyte subpopulation. Data files showing differences >20% were checked for their potential clinical relevance, based on age-matched percentile (p5-p95) reference ranges. In parallel, intra- and inter-observer reproducibility of MG vs AG&I were evaluated in a subset of 12 samples.ResultsThe AG&I approach was able to identify the vast majority of lymphoid events (>99%), associated with a significantly higher intra- and inter-observer reproducibility compared to MG. For most HD (83%) and patient (68%) samples, a high degree of agreement (<20% numerical differences in absolute cell counts/µL) was obtained between MG and the AG&I module. This translated into a minimal impact (<5% of observations) on the final clinical interpretation. In all except three samples, extended expert revision of the AG&I approach revealed no error. In the three remaining samples aberrant maturation and/or abnormal marker expression profiles were seen leading in all three cases to numerical alarms by AG&I.ConclusionAltogether, our results indicate that replacement of MG by the AG&I module would be associated with a greater reproducibility and robustness of results in the diagnostic work-up of patients suspected of PID. However, expert revision of the results of AG&I of PIDOT data still remains necessary in samples with numerical alterations and aberrant B- and T-cell maturation and/or marker expression profiles.
abstract_unstemmed	BackgroundMultiparameter flow cytometry (FC) is essential in the diagnostic work-up and classification of primary immunodeficiency (PIDs). The EuroFlow PID Orientation tube (PIDOT) allows identification of all main lymphocyte subpopulations in blood. To standardize data analysis, tools for Automated Gating and Identification (AG&I) of the informative cell populations, were developed by EuroFlow. Here, we evaluated the contribution of these innovative AG&I tools to the standardization of FC in the diagnostic work-up of PID, by comparing AG&I against expert-based (EuroFlow-standardized) Manual Gating (MG) strategy, and its impact on the reproducibility and clinical interpretation of results.MethodsFC data files from 44 patients (13 CVID, 12 PID, 19 non-PID) and 26 healthy donor (HD) blood samples stained with PIDOT were analyzed in parallel by MG and AG&I, using Infinicyt™ software (Cytognos). For comparison, percentage differences in absolute cell counts/µL were calculated for each lymphocyte subpopulation. Data files showing differences >20% were checked for their potential clinical relevance, based on age-matched percentile (p5-p95) reference ranges. In parallel, intra- and inter-observer reproducibility of MG vs AG&I were evaluated in a subset of 12 samples.ResultsThe AG&I approach was able to identify the vast majority of lymphoid events (>99%), associated with a significantly higher intra- and inter-observer reproducibility compared to MG. For most HD (83%) and patient (68%) samples, a high degree of agreement (<20% numerical differences in absolute cell counts/µL) was obtained between MG and the AG&I module. This translated into a minimal impact (<5% of observations) on the final clinical interpretation. In all except three samples, extended expert revision of the AG&I approach revealed no error. In the three remaining samples aberrant maturation and/or abnormal marker expression profiles were seen leading in all three cases to numerical alarms by AG&I.ConclusionAltogether, our results indicate that replacement of MG by the AG&I module would be associated with a greater reproducibility and robustness of results in the diagnostic work-up of patients suspected of PID. However, expert revision of the results of AG&I of PIDOT data still remains necessary in samples with numerical alterations and aberrant B- and T-cell maturation and/or marker expression profiles.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
title_short	Improved Standardization of Flow Cytometry Diagnostic Screening of Primary Immunodeficiency by Software-Based Automated Gating
url	https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646 https://doaj.org/article/ffa5fd68136e4a5c92cb0cb572faeace https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646/full https://doaj.org/toc/1664-3224
remote_bool	true
author2	Annieck M. Diks Jana Neirinck Martín Perez-Andres Emilie De Maertelaere Magdalena A. Berkowska Tessa Kerre Mattias Hofmans Alberto Orfao Jacques J. M. van Dongen Filomeen Haerynck Jan Philippé Carolien Bonroy
author2Str	Annieck M. Diks Jana Neirinck Martín Perez-Andres Emilie De Maertelaere Magdalena A. Berkowska Tessa Kerre Mattias Hofmans Alberto Orfao Jacques J. M. van Dongen Filomeen Haerynck Jan Philippé Carolien Bonroy
ppnlink	657998354
callnumber-subject	RC - Internal Medicine
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646
callnumber-a	RC581-607
up_date	2024-07-03T20:53:22.518Z
_version_	1803592665683460096
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ051530562</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230308161815.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230227s2020 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ051530562</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJffa5fd68136e4a5c92cb0cb572faeace</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RC581-607</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Eleni Linskens</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Improved Standardization of Flow Cytometry Diagnostic Screening of Primary Immunodeficiency by Software-Based Automated Gating</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">BackgroundMultiparameter flow cytometry (FC) is essential in the diagnostic work-up and classification of primary immunodeficiency (PIDs). The EuroFlow PID Orientation tube (PIDOT) allows identification of all main lymphocyte subpopulations in blood. To standardize data analysis, tools for Automated Gating and Identification (AG&I) of the informative cell populations, were developed by EuroFlow. Here, we evaluated the contribution of these innovative AG&I tools to the standardization of FC in the diagnostic work-up of PID, by comparing AG&I against expert-based (EuroFlow-standardized) Manual Gating (MG) strategy, and its impact on the reproducibility and clinical interpretation of results.MethodsFC data files from 44 patients (13 CVID, 12 PID, 19 non-PID) and 26 healthy donor (HD) blood samples stained with PIDOT were analyzed in parallel by MG and AG&I, using Infinicyt™ software (Cytognos). For comparison, percentage differences in absolute cell counts/µL were calculated for each lymphocyte subpopulation. Data files showing differences &gt;20% were checked for their potential clinical relevance, based on age-matched percentile (p5-p95) reference ranges. In parallel, intra- and inter-observer reproducibility of MG vs AG&I were evaluated in a subset of 12 samples.ResultsThe AG&I approach was able to identify the vast majority of lymphoid events (&gt;99%), associated with a significantly higher intra- and inter-observer reproducibility compared to MG. For most HD (83%) and patient (68%) samples, a high degree of agreement (&lt;20% numerical differences in absolute cell counts/µL) was obtained between MG and the AG&I module. This translated into a minimal impact (&lt;5% of observations) on the final clinical interpretation. In all except three samples, extended expert revision of the AG&I approach revealed no error. In the three remaining samples aberrant maturation and/or abnormal marker expression profiles were seen leading in all three cases to numerical alarms by AG&I.ConclusionAltogether, our results indicate that replacement of MG by the AG&I module would be associated with a greater reproducibility and robustness of results in the diagnostic work-up of patients suspected of PID. However, expert revision of the results of AG&I of PIDOT data still remains necessary in samples with numerical alterations and aberrant B- and T-cell maturation and/or marker expression profiles.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">flow cytometry</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">immunophenotyping</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">primary immunodeficiencies</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">automated gating</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">standardization</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">EuroFlow</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Immunologic diseases. Allergy</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Annieck M. Diks</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jana Neirinck</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Martín Perez-Andres</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Martín Perez-Andres</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Emilie De Maertelaere</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Magdalena A. Berkowska</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Tessa Kerre</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Mattias Hofmans</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Alberto Orfao</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Alberto Orfao</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jacques J. M. van Dongen</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Filomeen Haerynck</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jan Philippé</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jan Philippé</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Carolien Bonroy</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Carolien Bonroy</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Frontiers in Immunology</subfield><subfield code="d">Frontiers Media S.A., 2011</subfield><subfield code="g">11(2020)</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)657998354</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2606827-8</subfield><subfield code="x">16643224</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:11</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/ffa5fd68136e4a5c92cb0cb572faeace</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2020.584646/full</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1664-3224</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">11</subfield><subfield code="j">2020</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.4021854

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Improved Standardization of Flow Cytometry Diagnostic Screening of Primary Immunodeficiency by Software-Based Automated Gating

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?