Precision and linearity targets for validation of an IFNgamma ELISPOT, cytokine flow cytometry, and tetramer assay using CMV peptides.

BACKGROUND: Single-cell assays of immune function are increasingly used to monitor T cell responses in immunotherapy clinical trials. Standardization and validation of such assays are therefore important to interpretation of the clinical trial data. Here we assess the levels of intra-assay, inter-assay, and inter-operator precision, as well as linearity, of CD8+ T cell IFNgamma-based ELISPOT and cytokine flow cytometry (CFC), as well as tetramer assays. RESULTS: Precision was measured in cryopreserved PBMC with a low, medium, or high response level to a CMV pp65 peptide or peptide mixture. Intra-assay precision was assessed using 6 replicates per assay; inter-assay precision was assessed by performing 8 assays on different days; and inter-operator precision was assessed using 3 different operators working on the same day. Percent CV values ranged from 4% to 133% depending upon the assay and response level. Linearity was measured by diluting PBMC from a high responder into PBMC from a non-responder, and yielded R2 values from 0.85 to 0.99 depending upon the assay and antigen. CONCLUSION: These data provide target values for precision and linearity of single-cell assays for those wishing to validate these assays in their own laboratories. They also allow for comparison of the precision and linearity of ELISPOT, CFC, and tetramer across a range of response levels. There was a trend toward tetramer assays showing the highest precision, followed closely by CFC, and then ELISPOT; while all three assays had similar linearity. These findings are contingent upon the use of optimized protocols for each assay.

Enumerating antigen-specific T-cell responses in peripheral blood: a comparison of peptide MHC Tetramer, ELISpot, and intracellular cytokine analysis.

Detection of the circulating antigen-specific T-cell response to immunization is an important biologic end point in clinical trials of cancer vaccines. Typically employed assays are peptide MHC tetramer, ELISpot, and intracellular cytokine analysis. Although there is no agreement on the definition of a positive response in these assays, many groups have chosen a number of T cells greater than 2 standard deviations above the mean of the negative controls. The authors wished to determine how well this cutoff performed for each of these assays in detecting positive and negative T-cell responses to a model antigen, the immunodominant HLA-A*0201-restricted epitope of cytomegalovirus (CMV) pp65. For each assay, the mean + 2 standard deviations of the response for CMV seronegatives was the point that best separated the two groups. Using this value, each assay had a sensitivity of 87.5% and specificity of 95% to 100% and exhibited a high degree of concordance (kappa 0.76-0.9) with the other two. The authors conclude that currently available immunologic assays perform well in detecting biologically relevant levels of antigen-specific T cells. These assays will better define the quantity and quality of protective immune responses to viral disease and offer insight into the requirements for protective anti-cancer immunity.