A one‐step assay for sorted <scp>CD3</scp><sup>+</sup> cell purity and chimerism after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A hematopoietic chimerism assay is the laboratory test for monitoring engraftment and quantifying the proportions of donor and recipient cells after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation recipients. Flow cytometry is the reference method for determining the purity of CD3 + cells on the chimerism of selected CD3 + cells. In the present study, we developed a single‐step procedure that combines the CD3 + purity assay (using the PCR‐based Non‐T Genomic Detection Kit from Accumol, Calgary, Canada) and the qPCR chimerism monitoring assay (the QTRACE qPCR assay from Jeta Molecular, Utrecht, the Netherlands). First, for the CD3 + purity assay, we used a PCR‐friendly protocol by changing the composition of the ready‐to‐use reaction tubes (buffer and taq polymerase) and obtained a satisfactory calibration plot ( R 2 = 0.8924) with a DNA reference scale of 2 ng/μl. Next, 29 samples (before and after CD3 positive selection) were analyzed, the mean cell purity was, respectively, 19.6% ± 6.45 and 98.9% ± 1.07 in the flow cytometry assay; 26.8% ± 7.63 and 98.5% ± 1.79 in the PCR‐based non‐T genomic detection assay. Our results showed that the CD3 + purity assay using a qPCR kit is a robust alternative to the flow cytometry assay and is associated with time savings when combined with a qPCR chimerism assay.
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 | 0.000 | 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".