Fabien X Lü1, Robert E Esch. 1. Greer Laboratories Inc., 639 Nuway Circle, P.O. Box 800, Lenoir, NC 28645, United States. fabien.lu@novartis.com
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The analysis of immunological markers in nasal secretions provides valuable information for studying nasal mucosa diseases and monitoring immunotherapy and immunity to vaccines administered locally. However, the concentration of biomarkers is highly variable in nasal secretions because of the diversity of collection methods. A nasal secretion collection device was developed to increase detectability of the assay, standardize the sampling technique, eliminate unknown dilution factor, and minimize analyte loss during the sample processing. OBJECTIVE: To develop and demonstrate the performance characteristics of a novel nasal secretion collector and its advantages over nasal lavage techniques. METHODS: Characteristics of absorption and recovery of the liquid or proteins by different types of polyurethane foam were evaluated. The concentration of immunoglobulins, inflammatory mediators and allergen specific antibodies was comparatively measured in nasal secretions collected by the novel nasal secretion collector and nasal lavages. RESULTS: The concentrations of cytokines, eosinophil cationic protein, and tryptase in nasal secretions obtained by the nasal secretion collector were at least 8-fold higher than those tested in nasal lavages. Furthermore, the levels of immunoglobulins and the grass/weed pollen allergen specific antibodies were 6- to 290-fold increased when the nasal secretion collector was used. The nasal secretion collector was easy to use, non-invasive, and caused minimal discomfort to subjects during sampling. CONCLUSION: A novel nasal secretion collector shows a significantly higher detectability and reproducibility than nasal lavages for analyzing immunological markers in nasal secretions. CLINICAL IMPLICATION: The nasal secretion collector represented an approach for collecting nasal secretions and can be applied for routine evaluations of nasal immune responses induced by mucosal vaccinations or infections, inflammations and therapeutic interventions. Published by Elsevier B.V.
BACKGROUND: The analysis of immunological markers in nasal secretions provides valuable information for studying nasal mucosa diseases and monitoring immunotherapy and immunity to vaccines administered locally. However, the concentration of biomarkers is highly variable in nasal secretions because of the diversity of collection methods. A nasal secretion collection device was developed to increase detectability of the assay, standardize the sampling technique, eliminate unknown dilution factor, and minimize analyte loss during the sample processing. OBJECTIVE: To develop and demonstrate the performance characteristics of a novel nasal secretion collector and its advantages over nasal lavage techniques. METHODS: Characteristics of absorption and recovery of the liquid or proteins by different types of polyurethane foam were evaluated. The concentration of immunoglobulins, inflammatory mediators and allergen specific antibodies was comparatively measured in nasal secretions collected by the novel nasal secretion collector and nasal lavages. RESULTS: The concentrations of cytokines, eosinophil cationic protein, and tryptase in nasal secretions obtained by the nasal secretion collector were at least 8-fold higher than those tested in nasal lavages. Furthermore, the levels of immunoglobulins and the grass/weed pollen allergen specific antibodies were 6- to 290-fold increased when the nasal secretion collector was used. The nasal secretion collector was easy to use, non-invasive, and caused minimal discomfort to subjects during sampling. CONCLUSION: A novel nasal secretion collector shows a significantly higher detectability and reproducibility than nasal lavages for analyzing immunological markers in nasal secretions. CLINICAL IMPLICATION: The nasal secretion collector represented an approach for collecting nasal secretions and can be applied for routine evaluations of nasal immune responses induced by mucosal vaccinations or infections, inflammations and therapeutic interventions. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Authors: Conner J Massey; Fernando Diaz Del Valle; Waleed M Abuzeid; Joshua M Levy; Sarina Mueller; Corrina G Levine; Stephanie S Smith; Benjamin S Bleier; Vijay R Ramakrishnan Journal: Int Forum Allergy Rhinol Date: 2019-12-17 Impact factor: 3.858
Authors: S Seshadri; D C Lin; M Rosati; R G Carter; J E Norton; L Suh; A Kato; R K Chandra; K E Harris; H W Chu; A T Peters; B K Tan; D B Conley; L C Grammer; R C Kern; R P Schleimer Journal: Allergy Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 13.146
Authors: Meghan E Rebuli; Adam M Speen; Phillip W Clapp; Ilona Jaspers Journal: Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol Date: 2016-12-23 Impact factor: 6.011
Authors: M Faizal Ghazali; H H Caline Koh-Tan; Mark McLaughlin; Paul Montague; Nicholas N Jonsson; P David Eckersall Journal: BMC Vet Res Date: 2014-09-05 Impact factor: 2.741
Authors: Trevor T Hansel; Tanushree Tunstall; Maria-Belen Trujillo-Torralbo; Betty Shamji; Ajerico Del-Rosario; Jaideep Dhariwal; Paul D W Kirk; Michael P H Stumpf; Jens Koopmann; Aurica Telcian; Julia Aniscenko; Leila Gogsadze; Eteri Bakhsoliani; Luminita Stanciu; Nathan Bartlett; Michael Edwards; Ross Walton; Patrick Mallia; Toby M Hunt; Trevor L Hunt; Duncan G Hunt; John Westwick; Matthew Edwards; Onn Min Kon; David J Jackson; Sebastian L Johnston Journal: EBioMedicine Date: 2017-03-28 Impact factor: 8.143
Authors: Ryan S Thwaites; Hannah C Jarvis; Nehmat Singh; Akhilesh Jha; Andy Pritchard; Hailing Fan; Tanushree Tunstall; Joan Nanan; Simon Nadel; Onn Min Kon; Peter J Openshaw; Trevor T Hansel Journal: J Vis Exp Date: 2018-01-21 Impact factor: 1.355
Authors: Ji Hye Kim; Moon Gyeong Yoon; Dae Hong Seo; Bong Sun Kim; Ga Young Ban; Young Min Ye; Yoo Seob Shin; Hae Sim Park Journal: Allergy Asthma Immunol Res Date: 2016-07 Impact factor: 5.764