Enzymatic amplification staining for single cell analysis: applied to in situ hybridization

Differences in intracellular protein levels in monocytes and CD4+ lymphocytes between bipolar depressed patients and healthy controls: A pilot study with tyramine-based signal-amplified flow cytometry

BACKGROUND

Molecular biomarkers for bipolar disorder (BD) that distinguish it from other manifestations of depressive symptoms remain unknown. The aim of this study was to determine if a very sensitive tyramine-based signal-amplification technology for flow cytometry (CellPrint™) could facilitate the identification of cell-specific analyte expression profiles of peripheral blood cells for bipolar depression (BPD) versus healthy controls (HCs).

METHODS

The diagnosis of psychiatric disorders was ascertained with Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview for DSM-5. Expression levels for eighteen protein analytes previously shown to be related to bipolar disorder were assessed with CellPrint™ in CD4⁺ T cells and monocytes of bipolar patients and HCs. Implementation of protein-protein interaction (PPI) network and pathway analysis was subsequently used to identify new analytes and pathways for subsequent interrogations.

RESULTS

Fourteen drug-naïve or -free patients with bipolar I or II depression and 17 healthy controls (HCs) were enrolled. The most distinguishable changes in analyte expression based on t-tests included GSK3β, HMGB1, IRS2, phospho-GSK3αβ, phospho-RELA, and TSPO in CD4⁺ T cells and calmodulin, GSK3β, IRS2, and phospho-HS1 in monocytes. Subsequent PPI and pathway analysis indicated that prolactin, leptin, BDNF, and interleukin-3 signal pathways were significantly different between bipolar patients and HCs.

LIMITATION

The sample size of the study was small and 2 patients were on medications.

CONCLUSION

In this pilot study, CellPrint™ was able to detect differences in cell-specific protein levels between BPD patients and HCs. A subsequent study including samples from patients with BPD, major depressive disorder, and HCs is warranted.

Divergent Directionality of Immune Cell-Specific Protein Expression between Bipolar Lithium Responders and Non-Responders Revealed by Enhanced Flow Cytometry

Background and Objectives: There is no biomarker to predict lithium response. This study used CellPrint™ enhanced flow cytometry to study 28 proteins representing a spectrum of cellular pathways in monocytes and CD4⁺ lymphocytes before and after lithium treatment in patients with bipolar disorder (BD). Materials and Methods: Symptomatic patients with BD type I or II received lithium (serum level ≥ 0.6 mEq/L) for 16 weeks. Patients were assessed with standard rating scales and divided into two groups, responders (≥50% improvement from baseline) and non-responders. Twenty-eight intracellular proteins in CD4⁺ lymphocytes and monocytes were analyzed with CellPrint™, an enhanced flow cytometry procedure. Data were analyzed for differences in protein expression levels. Results: The intent-to-treat sample included 13 lithium-responders (12 blood samples before treatment and 9 after treatment) and 11 lithium-non-responders (11 blood samples before treatment and 4 after treatment). No significant differences in expression between the groups was observed prior to lithium treatment. After treatment, the majority of analytes increased expression in responders and decreased expression in non-responders. Significant increases were seen for PDEB4 and NR3C1 in responders. A significant decrease was seen for NR3C1 in non-responders. Conclusions: Lithium induced divergent directionality of protein expression depending on the whether the patient was a responder or non-responder, elucidating molecular characteristics of lithium responsiveness. A subsequent study with a larger sample size is warranted.

New Technologies to Image Tumors

The premise of this book is the importance of the tumor microenvironment (TME). Until recently, most research on and clinical attention to cancer biology, diagnosis, and prognosis were focused on the malignant (or premalignant) cellular compartment that could be readily appreciated using standard morphology-based imaging.

Within the cell: analytical techniques for subcellular analysis

This review covers recent developments in the preparation, manipulation, and analyses of subcellular environments. In particular, it highlights approaches for (1) separation and detection of individual organelles, (2) preparation of ultra-pure organelle fractions, and (3) utilization of novel labeling strategies. These approaches, based on innovative technologies such as microfluidics, immunoisolation, mass spectrometry and electrophoresis, suggest that subcellular analyses will soon become as commonplace as single cell and bulk cellular assays.

D cyclins in lymphocytes

BACKGROUND

D cyclins are essential for the progression of cells through the G1 phase of the cell cycle. There are three distinct D cyclins. Cyclin D1 has been shown to be expressed by many different types of cells but not by lymphocytes. Cyclins D2 and D3 have been found in lymphocytes.

METHODS

We used high-resolution enzymatic amplification staining technology in conjunction with flow cytometry and confocal microscopy and with immunoblotting to reassess the expression of the D cyclins in human lymphocytes.

RESULTS

Using high-resolution technology for flow cytometry, we found all three D cyclins in quiescent human peripheral blood lymphocytes. Cyclin D1 was expressed in quiescent and activated cells at levels commensurate with those of actively proliferating tumor cell lines. Cyclin D1 was functional inasmuch as it was complexed with CDK4. In the quiescent cells, cyclin D1 was expressed in the cytoplasm but, after activation, was found in the nucleus.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings demonstrate that lymphocytes express cyclin D1 and necessitate a reappraisal of the hypothesis that the D cyclins subsume redundant activities with tissue-specific expression.