Article

Equivalence of ELISpot assays demonstrated between major HIV network laboratories.

International AIDS Vaccine Initiative Human Immunology Laboratory, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom.
PLoS ONE (Impact Factor: 3.73). 01/2010; 5(12):e14330. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0014330
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The Comprehensive T Cell Vaccine Immune Monitoring Consortium (CTC-VIMC) was created to provide standardized immunogenicity monitoring services for HIV vaccine trials. The ex vivo interferon-gamma (IFN-γ) ELISpot is used extensively as a primary immunogenicity assay to assess T cell-based vaccine candidates in trials for infectious diseases and cancer. Two independent, GCLP-accredited central laboratories of CTC-VIMC routinely use their own standard operating procedures (SOPs) for ELISpot within two major networks of HIV vaccine trials. Studies are imperatively needed to assess the comparability of ELISpot measurements across laboratories to benefit optimal advancement of vaccine candidates.
We describe an equivalence study of the two independently qualified IFN-g ELISpot SOPs. The study design, data collection and subsequent analysis were managed by independent statisticians to avoid subjectivity. The equivalence of both response rates and positivity calls to a given stimulus was assessed based on pre-specified acceptance criteria derived from a separate pilot study.
Detection of positive responses was found to be equivalent between both laboratories. The 95% C.I. on the difference in response rates, for CMV (-1.5%, 1.5%) and CEF (-0.4%, 7.8%) responses, were both contained in the pre-specified equivalence margin of interval [-15%, 15%]. The lower bound of the 95% C.I. on the proportion of concordant positivity calls for CMV (97.2%) and CEF (89.5%) were both greater than the pre-specified margin of 70%. A third CTC-VIMC central laboratory already using one of the two SOPs also showed comparability when tested in a smaller sub-study.
The described study procedure provides a prototypical example for the comparison of bioanalytical methods in HIV vaccine and other disease fields. This study also provides valuable and unprecedented information for future vaccine candidate evaluations on the comparison and pooling of ELISpot results generated by the CTC-VIMC central core laboratories.

0 0
 · 
1 Bookmark
 · 
98 Views
  • [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Emerging evidence indicates memory donor-reactive T cells are detrimental to transplant outcome and that quantifying the frequency of IFNγ-producing, donor-reactive PBMCs by ELISPOT has potential utility as an immune monitoring tool. Nonetheless, differences in assay performance among laboratories limit the ability to compare results. In an effort to standardize assays, we prepared a panel of common cellular reagent standards, developed and cross validated a standard operating procedure (SOP) for alloreactive IFNγ ELISPOT assays in several research laboratories supported by the NIH-funded Clinical Trials in Organ Transplantation (CTOT) Consortium. We demonstrate that strict adherence to the SOP and centralized data analysis results in high reproducibility with a coefficient of variance (CV) of ∼30%. This standardization of IFNγ ELISPOTassay will facilitate interpretation of data from multicenter transplantation research studies and provide the foundation for developing clinical laboratory testing strategies to guide therapeutic decision-making in transplant patients.
    American Journal of Transplantation 05/2013; · 6.19 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In the absence of replication of wells, empirical criteria for enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISpot) positivity use fixed differences or ratios between spot forming units (SFU) counts between test and control. We propose an alternative approach which first identifies the optimally variance-stabilizing transformation of the SFU counts, based on the Bland-Altman plot of the test and control wells. The second step is to derive a positivity threshold from the difference in between-plate distribution functions of the transformed test and control SFU counts. This method is illustrated using 1309 assay results from a cohort study of influenza in Vietnam in which some, but not all, of the peptide pools have clear tendencies for SFU counts to be higher in test than control wells.
    Journal of immunological methods 03/2013; · 2.35 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Study Design A randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled phase I trial. Methods The trial was conducted in 32 HIV-uninfected healthy volunteers to assess the safety and immunogenicity of prime-boost vaccination regimens with either 2 doses of ADVAX, a DNA vaccine containing Chinese HIV-1 subtype C env gp160, gag, pol and nef/tat genes, as a prime and 2 doses of TBC-M4, a recombinant MVA encoding Indian HIV-1 subtype C env gp160, gag, RT, rev, tat, and nef genes, as a boost in Group A or 3 doses of TBC-M4 alone in Group B participants. Out of 16 participants in each group, 12 received vaccine candidates and 4 received placebos. Results Both vaccine regimens were found to be generally safe and well tolerated. The breadth of anti-HIV binding antibodies and the titres of anti-HIV neutralizing antibodies were significantly higher (p<0.05) in Group B volunteers at 14 days post last vaccination. Neutralizing antibodies were detected mainly against Tier-1 subtype B and C viruses. HIV-specific IFN-γ ELISPOT responses were directed mostly to Env and Gag proteins. Although the IFN-γ ELISPOT responses were infrequent after ADVAX vaccinations, the response rate was significantly higher in group A after 1st and 2nd MVA doses as compared to the responses in group B volunteers. However, the priming effect was short lasting leading to no difference in the frequency, breadth and magnitude of IFN-γELISPOT responses between the groups at 3, 6 and 9 months post-last vaccination. Conclusions Although DNA priming resulted in enhancement of immune responses after 1st MVA boosting, the overall DNA prime MVA boost was not found to be immunologically superior to homologous MVA boosting.
    PLoS One. 2013 Feb;8(2):e55831. 02/2013;

Full-text (2 Sources)

View
33 Downloads
Available from
Mar 8, 2013