Cited by 34T-cell and B-cell ImmunologyPsoriasis: Treatment and PathogenesisDiabetes and associated disorders

OMIP‐015: Human regulatory and activated T‐cells without intracellular staining

Open access
Mahnke, Yolanda D., Beddall, Margaret H., Roederer, Mario·2013·Cytometry Part A

Abstract

The present panel was optimized to investigate the frequency and phenotype of regulatory T-cells (T reg ), as well as the activation status of CD4 1 and CD8 1 T-cells in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) from healthy individuals, without the use of intracellular staining (i.e., excluding the use of the canonical T reg marker, FoxP3).The panel has been developed using cryopreserved PBMC and we have observed similar results with fresh specimens.Other tissue types have not been tested.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cyto.a.22230

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • There is a general consensus that the 236A/E7 and 259D anti-human FOXP3 Ab clones are optimal.

    “Several studies have compared different anti-human FOXP3 Ab clones, and although there is some debate, there is a general consensus that the 236A/E7 and 259D clones are optimal [394-398].”

    From Guidelines for the use of flow cytometry and cell sorting in immunological studies (third edition) (2021) · cites this paper as [397]

    The Background says this panel avoids intracellular FoxP3 staining, and the reagent table lists no FOXP3 antibody. Searches for 236A/E7, 259D, and comparisons of FOXP3 antibody clones found no passage assessing either clone or reporting a consensus that they are optimal. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mahnke, Y. D., Beddall, M. H., & Roederer, M.
Affiliations
National Institutes of Health (US)
Corresponding author
Mahnke, Yolanda D.
Venue
Cytometry Part A
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-11-16
Volume
83A
Issue
2
Pages
179-181
ISSN
  • 1552-4922 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-4930
OpenAlex
W1998777981
Cited by
34
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2
FWCI
0.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cytometry Part A (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › T-cell and B-cell Immunology
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Psoriasis: Treatment and Pathogenesis
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Diabetes and associated disorders
Keywords
regulatory T cells, T cell activation, CD4+ T cells, CD8+ T cells, T cell phenotype, peripheral blood mononuclear cells, flow cytometry panel, healthy individuals
MeSH terms
Antigens, Differentiation, Flow Cytometry, Fluorescent Antibody Technique, Humans, Phenotype, CD4-Positive T-Lymphocytes, CD8-Positive T-Lymphocytes, T-Lymphocytes, Regulatory, Forkhead Transcription Factors, Interleukin-2 Receptor alpha Subunit, Interleukin-7 Receptor alpha Subunit

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review