RT-qPCR、流式细胞术和Di-4-ANEPPDHQ荧光鉴别巨噬细胞表型的比较分析

IF 2.2 Q3 BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
Ahmed Abu Siniyeh , Walhan Alshaer , Nirmeen Elzogheir , Majed Al-Holi , Dana A. Alqudah , Duaa Abuarqoub , Joanna M. Kwiatek
{"title":"RT-qPCR、流式细胞术和Di-4-ANEPPDHQ荧光鉴别巨噬细胞表型的比较分析","authors":"Ahmed Abu Siniyeh ,&nbsp;Walhan Alshaer ,&nbsp;Nirmeen Elzogheir ,&nbsp;Majed Al-Holi ,&nbsp;Dana A. Alqudah ,&nbsp;Duaa Abuarqoub ,&nbsp;Joanna M. Kwiatek","doi":"10.1016/j.bbrep.2025.102225","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study evaluates the effectiveness of fluorescence microscopy using Di-4-ANEPPDHQ in differentiating macrophage phenotypes (M0, M1, and M2) compared to RT-qPCR and flow cytometry. Using THP-1 monocyte-derived macrophages, we assessed cytokine expression (IL-1β, IL-6, IL-10) via RT-qPCR, surface markers (CD86, CD64, CD206) through flow cytometry, and membrane properties with Di-4-ANEPPDHQ fluorescence. RT-qPCR showed significant differences in cytokine expression: M1 macrophages had elevated IL-1β (p &lt; 0.0001) and IL-6 (p &lt; 0.0001), while M2 macrophages exhibited higher IL-10 levels (p = 0.0030). Flow cytometry revealed distinct surface marker profiles, with M1 expressing high CD64 and M2 showing increased CD206. Di-4-ANEPPDHQ fluorescence indicated membrane order differences: M1 macrophages were depolarized (red shift), while M2 macrophages were hyperpolarized (blue shift). Statistical analysis confirmed high sensitivity and specificity for RT-qPCR and flow cytometry, while Di-4-ANEPPDHQ fluorescence technique provides real-time observations of changes in macrophage membrane behavior, enhancing understanding of their dynamic properties under various conditions. These findings highlight the value of integrating these methods for comprehensive macrophage phenotype characterization, which can aid in understanding macrophage polarization in immune responses and disease contexts.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":8771,"journal":{"name":"Biochemistry and Biophysics Reports","volume":"44 ","pages":"Article 102225"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative analysis of RT-qPCR, flow cytometry, and Di-4-ANEPPDHQ fluorescence for distinguishing macrophages phenotypes\",\"authors\":\"Ahmed Abu Siniyeh ,&nbsp;Walhan Alshaer ,&nbsp;Nirmeen Elzogheir ,&nbsp;Majed Al-Holi ,&nbsp;Dana A. Alqudah ,&nbsp;Duaa Abuarqoub ,&nbsp;Joanna M. Kwiatek\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.bbrep.2025.102225\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>This study evaluates the effectiveness of fluorescence microscopy using Di-4-ANEPPDHQ in differentiating macrophage phenotypes (M0, M1, and M2) compared to RT-qPCR and flow cytometry. Using THP-1 monocyte-derived macrophages, we assessed cytokine expression (IL-1β, IL-6, IL-10) via RT-qPCR, surface markers (CD86, CD64, CD206) through flow cytometry, and membrane properties with Di-4-ANEPPDHQ fluorescence. RT-qPCR showed significant differences in cytokine expression: M1 macrophages had elevated IL-1β (p &lt; 0.0001) and IL-6 (p &lt; 0.0001), while M2 macrophages exhibited higher IL-10 levels (p = 0.0030). Flow cytometry revealed distinct surface marker profiles, with M1 expressing high CD64 and M2 showing increased CD206. Di-4-ANEPPDHQ fluorescence indicated membrane order differences: M1 macrophages were depolarized (red shift), while M2 macrophages were hyperpolarized (blue shift). Statistical analysis confirmed high sensitivity and specificity for RT-qPCR and flow cytometry, while Di-4-ANEPPDHQ fluorescence technique provides real-time observations of changes in macrophage membrane behavior, enhancing understanding of their dynamic properties under various conditions. These findings highlight the value of integrating these methods for comprehensive macrophage phenotype characterization, which can aid in understanding macrophage polarization in immune responses and disease contexts.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8771,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biochemistry and Biophysics Reports\",\"volume\":\"44 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102225\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biochemistry and Biophysics Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405580825003127\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biochemistry and Biophysics Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405580825003127","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

与RT-qPCR和流式细胞术相比,本研究评估了使用Di-4-ANEPPDHQ荧光显微镜区分巨噬细胞表型(M0, M1和M2)的有效性。使用THP-1单核细胞来源的巨噬细胞,我们通过RT-qPCR检测细胞因子(IL-1β, IL-6, IL-10)的表达,通过流式细胞术检测表面标志物(CD86, CD64, CD206),并使用Di-4-ANEPPDHQ荧光检测膜特性。RT-qPCR显示细胞因子表达有显著差异:M1巨噬细胞IL-1β (p < 0.0001)和IL-6 (p < 0.0001)升高,M2巨噬细胞IL-10水平升高(p = 0.0030)。流式细胞术显示明显的表面标记谱,M1高表达CD64, M2高表达CD206。Di-4-ANEPPDHQ荧光显示膜序差异:M1巨噬细胞去极化(红移),M2巨噬细胞超极化(蓝移)。统计分析证实了RT-qPCR和流式细胞术具有较高的灵敏度和特异性,而Di-4-ANEPPDHQ荧光技术可以实时观察巨噬细胞膜行为的变化,增强了对各种条件下巨噬细胞膜动态特性的了解。这些发现强调了综合这些方法进行巨噬细胞表型表征的价值,这有助于理解免疫反应和疾病背景下巨噬细胞极化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative analysis of RT-qPCR, flow cytometry, and Di-4-ANEPPDHQ fluorescence for distinguishing macrophages phenotypes
This study evaluates the effectiveness of fluorescence microscopy using Di-4-ANEPPDHQ in differentiating macrophage phenotypes (M0, M1, and M2) compared to RT-qPCR and flow cytometry. Using THP-1 monocyte-derived macrophages, we assessed cytokine expression (IL-1β, IL-6, IL-10) via RT-qPCR, surface markers (CD86, CD64, CD206) through flow cytometry, and membrane properties with Di-4-ANEPPDHQ fluorescence. RT-qPCR showed significant differences in cytokine expression: M1 macrophages had elevated IL-1β (p < 0.0001) and IL-6 (p < 0.0001), while M2 macrophages exhibited higher IL-10 levels (p = 0.0030). Flow cytometry revealed distinct surface marker profiles, with M1 expressing high CD64 and M2 showing increased CD206. Di-4-ANEPPDHQ fluorescence indicated membrane order differences: M1 macrophages were depolarized (red shift), while M2 macrophages were hyperpolarized (blue shift). Statistical analysis confirmed high sensitivity and specificity for RT-qPCR and flow cytometry, while Di-4-ANEPPDHQ fluorescence technique provides real-time observations of changes in macrophage membrane behavior, enhancing understanding of their dynamic properties under various conditions. These findings highlight the value of integrating these methods for comprehensive macrophage phenotype characterization, which can aid in understanding macrophage polarization in immune responses and disease contexts.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Biochemistry and Biophysics Reports
Biochemistry and Biophysics Reports Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Biophysics
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
191
审稿时长
59 days
期刊介绍: Open access, online only, peer-reviewed international journal in the Life Sciences, established in 2014 Biochemistry and Biophysics Reports (BB Reports) publishes original research in all aspects of Biochemistry, Biophysics and related areas like Molecular and Cell Biology. BB Reports welcomes solid though more preliminary, descriptive and small scale results if they have the potential to stimulate and/or contribute to future research, leading to new insights or hypothesis. Primary criteria for acceptance is that the work is original, scientifically and technically sound and provides valuable knowledge to life sciences research. We strongly believe all results deserve to be published and documented for the advancement of science. BB Reports specifically appreciates receiving reports on: Negative results, Replication studies, Reanalysis of previous datasets.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信