Abstract
Abstract
Background
The purification of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) by means of density gradient (1.07 g/mL) centrifugation is one of the most commonly used methods in diagnostics and research laboratories as well as in biobanks. Here, we evaluated whether it was possible to set up an automated protocol for PBMC purification using a programmable liquid handling robotized workstation (Tecan, Freedom EVO 150). We selected a population composed of 30 subjects for whom it was possible to dispose of two ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) vacutainer tubes containing unfractionated peripheral blood. The purification of PBMCs was performed in parallel using automated and manual workflows.
Results
An automated workflow using the Freedom EVO 150 liquid handling workstation was generated for the isolation of PBMCs. This protocol allowed blood dilution in Dulbecco’s phosphate-buffered saline (DPBS), stratification onto the density gradient, and the collection of PBMC rings after centrifugation. The comparison between the automated and manual methods revealed no significant differences after separation in terms of total mononuclear cell enrichment, red blood cell contamination, or leucocyte formula, including the percentage of lymphoid subpopulations as B, T and natural killer (NK) lymphocytes.
Conclusions
Our results show that it is possible to set up an automated protocol for the isolation of PBMCs using a robotized liquid handling workstation. This automated protocol provided comparable results to the routinely used manual method. This automatic method could be of interest for those working in biobanking or industries involved in diagnostics and therapeutics field, to avoid operator-dependent errors as well as procedures standardization.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology,General Medicine
Reference26 articles.
1. Coppola L, Cianflone A, Grimaldi AM, Incoronato M, Bevilacqua P, Messina F, et al. Biobanking in health care: evolution and future directions. J Trans Med. 2019;17:172.
2. Weinstein JN, Collisson EA, Mills GB, Shaw KRM, Ozenberger BA, Ellrott K, et al. The Cancer Genome Atlas Pan-Cancer analysis project. Nat Genet. 2013;45(10):1113–20.
3. Tomczak K, Czerwinska P, Wiznerowicz M. The cancer genome atlas (TCGA): an immeasurable source of knowledge. Contemp Oncol (Poznan, Poland). 2015;19(1A):A68–77.
4. Langhof H, Kahrass H, Illig T, Jahns R, Strech D. Current practices for access, compensation, and prioritization in biobanks. Results from an interview study. Eur J Hum Genet. 2018;26(11):1572–81.
5. Vaught J, Campbell LD, Betsou F, Garcia DL, Pugh RS, Sexton KC, et al. The ISBER best practices: insight from the editors of the third edition. Biopreserv Biobank. 2012;10(2):76–8.
Cited by
10 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献