Cumulus Cell Gene Expression Profile A Potential Indicator of Oocyte Quality in Women Undergoing Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART).

2008 ◽  
Vol 78 (Suppl_1) ◽  
pp. 82-82
Author(s):  
Surabi Veeraragavan ◽  
Laurie McKenzie ◽  
Chad Shaw ◽  
Ruihong Chen ◽  
Martin M. Matzuk
2016 ◽  
Vol 7_2016 ◽  
pp. 60-66
Author(s):  
Safronova N.A. Safronova ◽  
Kalinina E.A. Kalinina ◽  
Donnikov A.E. Donnikov ◽  
Burmenskaya O.V. Burmenskaya ◽  
Makarova N.P. Makarova ◽  
...  

Blood ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 99 (7) ◽  
pp. 2285-2290 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Z. Huang ◽  
Warren G. Sanger ◽  
Timothy C. Greiner ◽  
Louis M. Staudt ◽  
Dennis D. Weisenburger ◽  
...  

Recently we have identified subgroups of de novo primary diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) based on complementary DNA microarray-generated gene expression profiles. To correlate the gene expression profiles with cytogenetic abnormalities in these DLBCLs, we examined the occurrence of the t(14;18)(q32;q21) in the 2 distinctive subgroups of DLBCL: one with the germinal center B-cell gene expression signature and the other with the activated B cell–like gene expression signature. The t(14;18) was detected in 7 of 35 cases (20%). All 7 t(14;18)-positive cases had a germinal center B-cell gene expression profile, representing 35% of the cases in this subgroup, and 6 of these 7 cases had very similar gene expression profiles. The expression of bcl-2 and bcl-6 proteins was not significantly different between the t(14;18)-positive and -negative cases, whereas CD10 was detected only in the group with the germinal center B-cell expression profile, and CD10 was most frequently expressed in the t(14;18)-positive cases. This study supports the validity of subdividing DLBCL into 2 major subgroups by gene expression profiling, with the t(14;18) being an important event in the pathogenesis of a subset of DLBCL arising from germinal center B cells. CD10 protein expression is useful in identifying cases of DLBCL with a germinal center B-cell gene expression profile and is often expressed in cases with the t(14;18).


PLoS ONE ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. e0144351 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susanne T. Gren ◽  
Thomas B. Rasmussen ◽  
Sabina Janciauskiene ◽  
Katarina Håkansson ◽  
Jens G. Gerwien ◽  
...  

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 5806-5806
Author(s):  
Rohtesh S. Mehta ◽  
Xiaohua Chen ◽  
Antony Jeyaraj ◽  
Paul Szabolcs

Abstract Background: Ex-vivo expansion of CBT-cells using CD3/CD28 co-stimulatory beads, IL-2 + IL-7 and subsequent priming against leukemia cell lines using IL-15 generated specific CTLs. [1, 2] Hypothesis: We hypothesized that (a) patient-derived AML-specific PB auto CTLs could be generated with immune-stimulatory culture condition (b) Resistant AML samples would possess gene expression profiles similar to MDSCs (myeloid-derived suppressor cells) (c) Frequency of Tregs (CD4+CD25brightFoxP3+) and T-cell co-signaling molecules gene expression will be different between effective and ineffective CTLs. Methods: AML & auto T-cells were purified from cryopreserved PBMC of AML patients admitted with acute blast crisis (n=8). AML blasts were sustained in StemSpan™ Serum-Free media [STEMCELL Technologies] with MSC support + cytokine cocktail (IL-3, SCF, FLT3L, GMCSF, IL-4). T-cells were expanded in culture for 2 weeks as reported [1, 2] and subsequently primed with γ-irradiated auto AML weekly X 3 with IL15 + CD28ab [BD Biosciences]. At the end of week 3 (EOW3), cytotoxicity was assessed against AML and irrelevant targets - IM9 (lymphoid) and U937 (myeloid) cell lines, loaded with BATDA at an E:T ratio of 40:1, 20:1, 10:1 and 5:1 using DELFIA® EuTDA assay.[2] IFN-γ ELISPOT assay against same targets was also done.[2] RT-qPCR analysis was performed on AML & T-cells before and after priming, using Power SYBR® Green master mix (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and StepOne Plus system [Life Technologies]. Two-tailed student t-testcompared experimental groups. Results · T-cells expanded in all samples (n=8) with a median expansion of 155-fold (range 11-489), at EOW3. · ELISPOT assay was positive in 4/8 samples. [Fig 1] · CTL assay was difficult to standardize for primary AML blasts due to high degree of spontaneous apoptosis (>30% spontaneous release [SR]). · 2/8 samples were deemed evaluable (SR<30%). · Both samples showed AML-specific lysis. [Fig 2] · Overall, AML-specific autologous CTL could be generated from 5 of 8 samples based on ELISPOT & CTL assays, regardless of original FAB immunophenotype, not shown. · Tregs proportion declined significantly in effective CTLs post-priming as compared to pre-priming (56% to 24%, p-value 0.046, n=4). [Fig 3] · T-cell gene expression profiling showed significant differences in effective vs ineffective CTLs. [Table 1] · Resistant AML (n=3) had up-regulated downstream markers associated with MDSC generation compared to “non-resistant” AML (n=5). [Table 2] Conclusions (a) AML-specific auto CTLs can be generated (b) Tregs decreased with priming in effective CTLs (c) differential T-cell gene expression profile exists between effective and ineffective CTLs (d) AML gene expression suggests MDSC-like profile in resistant samples.Abstract 5806. TABLE 1:T-CELL GENE EXPRESSION PROFILE (POST VS PRE-PRIMING)Effective CTLs (n=5)Ineffective CTLs (n=3)GeneΔΔ Ct(Post - Pre) (mean, SEM)P-valueFold change (mean, SEM)ΔΔ Ct(Post - Pre) (mean, SEM)P-valueFold change (mean, SEM)4-1BB-3.17 (0.76)0.02514 (7.7)1.98 (1.04)0.190.39 (0.22)HVEM-2.43 (0.61)0.0287.3 (3.7)0.14 (1.65)0.951.57 (1.28)LIGHT-3.62 (0.73)0.01617.3 (7.3)1.78 (1.84)0.441.1 (0.98)PRKC-α-2.03 (0.47)0.0234.6 (1.1)1.89 (0.36)0.0340.29 (0.08)PRKC-θ-3.36 (0.59)0.0113.7 (6.7)0.25 (0.59)0.710.99 (0.41)LAIR1-3.81 (0.42)0.00316.2 (5.6)-1.35 (2.20)0.6017.15 (16.5)PP2A-2.40 (0.57)0.0256.7 (2.6)0.49 (1.57)0.791.89 (1.52)2B4-1.53 (1.14)0.274.98 (1.82)-3.48 (0.11)0.0211.2 (0.9)LTA-α-1.18 (0.78)0.233.61 (2.11)2.69 (0.18)0.0430.16 (0.02)LTA-β-0.93 (0.63)0.242.49 (0.99)2.24 (0.47)0.0420.23 (0.08) TABLE 2: GENE EXPRESSION PROFILE RESISTANT VS NON-RESISTANT AML Gene ΔΔ Ct (mean, SEM) 95% CI P-value Relative fold change JAK1 -4.63 (1.98) -9.48 0.21 0.0579 24.83 JAK2 -5.38 (0.94) -7.67 -3.08 0.0012 41.52 JAK3 -5.90 (2.17) -12.81 1.01 0.0726 59.77 S100A8 -7.16 (2.66) -14.01 -0.32 0.0432 143.27 S100A9 -8.31 (2.75) -15.04 -1.59 0.0233 318.37 c-myc -2.78 (0.59) -4.24 -1.33 0.0034 6.89 Refs: 1.Davis et al. Cancer Research 2010;70(13):5249 2.Jeyaraj A, Chen X, Szabolcs P. IL-15 Induced Polyclonal CTL Generated From Expanded CBT Cells Against Leukemia Cell Lines Constitutes IFN-γ Producing Cells and TCRγδ Cells. ASH 2012 Annual Meeting Figure 1 Figure 1. Figure 2 Figure 2. Figure 3 Figure 3. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


Author(s):  
Onoriode Oyiborhoro ◽  
Oriakhi Kelly ◽  
Esosa S. Uhunmwangho ◽  
Kingsley A. Iteire ◽  
Enoh F. Akpojotor

The microarray technology is a very powerful technology that combines molecular biology and computer technology to analyze the gene expression levels for most or all of the genes in a whole genome simultaneously, at very high resolutions. This technology has wide applications, including gene interaction studies for discovery of genes responsible for different diseases; classification of cancers and other diseases; prediction of clinical outcomes or prognosis for different diseases; response to therapy and development of new therapeutic agents, including gene therapy. It is therefore a very potent, unbiased and sensitive technology for the discovery of novel genes involved in the pathogenesis or control of diseases including cancers and autoimmune diseases. In the present study, we seek to give a clear and detailed account of the microarray gene expression protocol using the mouse T-cell gene expression profile, including challenges involved and how to overcome them, as well as detailed analysis of results obtained.


2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (suppl_6) ◽  
pp. vi100-vi100
Author(s):  
Tansy Zhao ◽  
Julie Metcalf ◽  
Mamatjan Yasin ◽  
Ken Aldape ◽  
Gelareh Zadeh

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document