Flow cytometric detection of circulating dendritic cells in healthy subjects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dendritic cells (DCs) are the key antigen-presenting cells controlling the initiation of the T cell- dependent immune response. Currently, two peripheral blood DC subsets have been identified on the basis of their CD11c expression. The CD11c-negative (CD11c-) DCs (expressing high levels of CD123) are designated as lymphoid-derived DCs (DC2), whereas the CD11c+/CD123- cells, do identify the myeloid-derived DCs (DC1). A growing number of studies have been conducted in recent years on both the quantitative and functional alterations of DCs and their subsets in different pathological conditions. In the present study we assessed, using two different flow cytometric (FCM) techniques, the normal profile of blood DCs in 50 italian adult healthy subjects (M/F: 25/25, median age 42.5 years, range 20-65). The percentage and the absolute number of DCs and their subsets, were obtained starting from whole blood samples in two ways: 1) by calculating the number of DCs when gated as lineage-negative/ HLA-DR+ and identifing the two subsets as CD11c+ (DC1) and CD123+ (DC2) and 2) by using three specific markers: BDCA.1 (CD11c+ high/CD123+ low, myeloid DCs); BDCA.2 (CD11c-/ CD123+high, lymphoid DCs); BDCA.3 (CD11c+low /CD123-, myeloid DCs). Six parameters, 4-color FCM analysis were perfomed with a BD FACSCanto equipment. The mean values of the percentage and of the absolute number were: 0.5+/-0.2% and 30+/-11 cells/microL for DCs; 0.2+/-0.1% and 15+/-6 cells/microL for DC1; 0.2+/-0.1% and 15+/-7 cells/microL for DC2. The same values were: 0.2+/-0.1% and 16+/-7 cells/microL for BDCA.1; 0.2+/-0.1% and 12+/-7 cells/microL for BDCA.2; 0.02+/-0.01% and 2+/-1 cells/microL for BDCA.3, respectively. Our study confirmes that the two types of FCM analysis are able to identify the DC population. We also provides the first reference values on normal rates and counts of blood DCs in italian adult healthy subjects.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".