Immunophenotyping Using Dried and Lyophilized Reagents

  • Marc Langweiler
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 2032)


Antibody reagents that are used for flow cytometry immunophenotyping have traditionally been prepared by combining individual liquid antibody conjugates into mixtures. These cocktails have limited shelf-life, and their preparation is time-consuming and prone to laboratory error. Manufacturers of these reagents, in collaboration with several clinical and research centers, have made advances in constructing dried antibody cocktails which have addressed many of the problems inherent in preparing the liquid cocktails on the lab bench. This chapter discusses methods for the use of dried reagents.

Key words

Flow cytometry Immunophenotyping Harmonization Dried antibody cocktail Lyophilization 


  1. 1.
    Hammerling JA (2012) A review of medical errors in laboratory diagnostics and where we are today. Lab Med 43(2):41–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jamin C, Lann L, Alvarez-Errico D et al (2016) Multi-center harmonization of flow cytometers in the context of the European “PRECISEADS” project. Autoimmun Rev 15(11):1038–1045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    van Dongen JJM, Lhermitte L, Böttcher S et al (2012) EuroFlow antibody panels for standardized n-dimensional flow cytometric immunophenotyping of normal, reactive and malignant leukocytes. Leukemia 26(9):1908–1975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Van der Velden VHJ, Flores-Montero J, Perez-Andres M et al (2017) Optimization and testing of dried antibody tube: the EuroFlow LST and PIDOT tubes as examples. J Immunol Methods.
  5. 5.
    Glier H, Heijnen I, Hauwel M et al (2017) Standardization of 8-color flow cytometry across different flow cytometer instruments: a feasibility study in clinical laboratories in Switzerland. J Immunol Methods.
  6. 6.
    Hedley BD, Keeney M, Popma J et al (2015) Novel lymphocyte screening tube using dried monoclonal antibody reagents. Cytometry B Clin Cytom 88(6):361–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rajab A, Axler O, Leung J et al (2017) Ten-color 15-antibody flow cytometry panel for immunophenotyping of lymphocyte population. Int J Lab Hem 39(Suppl. 1):76–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pitoiset F, Cassard L, Soufi E et al (2018) Deep phenotyping of immune cell populations by optimized and standardized flow cytometry analyses. Cytometry A.
  9. 9.
    Maecker HT, McCoy JP, FOCIS Human Immunophenotyping Consortium (2010) A model for harmonizing flow cytometry in clinical trials. Nat Immunol 11(11):975–978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chan RC, Kotner JS, Chuang CM et al (2017) Stabilization of pre-optimized multicolor cocktails for flow cytometry applications. Cytometry B Clin Cytom 92(6):508–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Maecker HT, McCoy JP, Nussenblatt R (2012) Standardizing immunophenotyping for the human immunology project. Nat Rev Immunol 12(3):191–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Finak G, Langweiler M, Jaimes M et al (2016) Standardizing flow cytometry immunophenotyping analysis from the human immunophenotyping consortium. Sci Rep.
  13. 13.
    Feher K, Kirsch J, Radbruch A et al (2014) Cell population identification using fluorescence-minus-one controls with a one-class classifying algorithm. Bioinformatics 30(23):3372–3378CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marc Langweiler
    • 1
  1. 1.AshevilleUSA

Personalised recommendations