ライフサイエンスコーパス: surface marker

1 r glycoprotein 2 (GP2) as a PP-specific cell surface marker.

2 h17 cells in vitro and in vivo via CD25 cell surface marker.

3 erapeutically targeting CSC base sorely on a surface marker.

4 eoplasm that often expresses the CD4+ T cell surface marker.

5 ive cells and increased stem/progenitor cell surface markers.

6 om HSCs, which display a very similar set of surface markers.

7 ter of blood and the fold expression of cell surface markers.

8 fetal pancreatic differentiation using cell surface markers.

9 try together with various hematopoietic cell surface markers.

10 sult of context-dependent expression of cell surface markers.

11 challenging due to the lack of specific cell surface markers.

12 eton regulators and the localization of cell surface markers.

13 RNA, intracellular p24 Gag protein, and cell surface markers.

14 some biology is to sort exosomes by size and surface markers.

15 lly purified from the bone marrow using cell surface markers.

16 progenitor cells that express analogous cell-surface markers.

17 metry by relative cell size, granularity and surface markers.

18 of nontransgenic mice using CD31 and CD13 as surface markers.

19 fluorescence and the absence of well-defined surface markers.

20 mited by the lack of available specific cell surface markers.

21 ne signatures and differentiation-associated surface markers.

22 ield APHs that specifically target different surface markers.

23 a to rank-order candidate cell-type-specific surface markers.

24 detected at similar levels with tetramers or surface markers.

25 ab interactions in targeting oligomeric cell-surface markers.

26 lls as shown by cellular morphology and cell surface markers.

27 d mature arterial, venal, and lymphatic cell-surface markers.

28 ectrical activity, gene expression, and cell surface markers.

29 cytometry revealed expression of unique cell-surface markers.

30 alpha(+)CD4(+) T cells expressing naive cell surface markers.

31 aits but have only a short list of canonical surface markers.

32 cell mass cytometric measurements of 14 cell surface markers, 20 signaling/cell cycle proteins, and 6

33 We show herein that the cell surface marker 6-sulfo LacNAc (slan) can define slan-pos

34 esident renal macrophages coexpressing these surface markers acquire a proreparative phenotype, which

35 e live-cell phenotypic profiling of multiple surface markers acquired with small (<40 cells) collecti

36 expressed higher levels of more mature cell surface markers, additionally linking inflammasome activ

37 ere assessed by measuring expression of cell surface markers (adhesion molecules, fibrinogen-like pro

38 using fluorochrome-conjugated Abs to myeloid surface markers, along with CD163 mRNA.

39 csGRP78 co-localized with the mesangial cell surface marker alpha8-integrin.

40 technique is reproducible and scalable, and surface marker analysis by bead-based flow cytometry rev

41 Subsequent surface marker analysis revealed higher frequencies of C

42 melanoma cell adhesion molecule (MCAM) is a surface marker and adhesion molecule used by pathogenic

43 n this study, we define distinct patterns of surface marker and cytokine expression among the ILC sub

44 healthy control donors share a similar cell-surface marker and gene expression profile.

45 In summary, we describe here a novel cell surface marker and targeting tools for tumor macrophages

46 ar phagocytes that differ in their ontogeny, surface marker and transcription factor expression, and

47 ans that can be distinguished based on their surface marker and transcription factor expression.

48 al cells expressed specific endothelial cell surface markers and also exhibited the capacity for cell

49 labelling of cell populations based on their surface markers and applied it to labelling of the Feder

50 wn to express the LC-specific TROP-2 and Axl surface markers and contained Birbeck granules.

51 Based on their unique surface markers and cytokine profiles, these cells were

52 cells to reveal the connection between cell surface markers and distinct cell phenotypes.

53 sed a combination of flow cytometry for cell surface markers and enzyme-linked immunospot methods to

54 identifies CTCs based on detection of cancer surface markers and exclusion of immune markers.

55 Induced erythroblasts expressed erythroid surface markers and formed erythroid colonies.

56 Combined use of surface markers and functional assays to study CD4(+) T

57 ised of distinct subsets with different cell surface markers and functional characteristics and this

58 al dendritic cells (cDCs) with distinct cell surface markers and functions exist in mouse and human.

59 t subsets can be distinguished based on cell surface markers and pathophysiological function.

60 lay significantly altered expression of cell-surface markers and produce increased inflammatory cytok

61 (iv) expression of endothelial cell-specific surface markers and the absence of hematopoietic or myel

62 e skeletal stem cell population through cell surface markers and the development of single-cell techn

63 ional phenotypes characterized by their cell surface markers and their cytokine profiles.

64 trated through increased expression of known surface markers and through the differential modulation

65 These cells express surface markers and transcription factors associated wit

66 ed mass cytometry including a broad range of surface markers and transcription factors to accurately

67 lineage have been identified using numerous surface markers and transgenic reporters, but none is bo

68 eutrophil morphology (nucleus shape and cell-surface markers) and functions (phagocytosis, degranulat

69 (uPAR), a uniquely overexpressed cancer cell-surface marker, and facilitating the immune-mediated des

70 y for measuring cell entity, evaluating cell surface marker, and peculiarly in the field of stem cell

71 s characteristic transcription factors, cell surface markers, and cytokines, including glycoprotein h

72 Finally, changes in cellular metabolism, surface markers, and gene expression, but not miRNA prof

73 ding those encoding effector cytokines, cell surface markers, and key transcription factors.

74 Surface marker- and RNA-expression analyses, together wi

75 trophoblast progenitors, purified using the surface marker APA.

76 Because many cell surface markers are shared between AML blasts and health

77 Tumor cell-surface markers are usually overexpressed or mutated pro

78 should preferably not rely on tumor-specific surface markers, as these are only available in a limite

79 dicated by bronchoalveolar lavage eosinophil surface markers, as well as the release of eosinophil pe

80 tion of functional HLCs using the hepatocyte surface marker asialoglycoprotein receptor 1 (ASGR1).

81 We identified surface markers associated with each chromatin state tha

82 Importantly, PC-M cells expressed surface markers associated with pericytes.

83 y of human Tregs using an extensive panel of surface markers associated with Treg function and phenot

84 he aim of this investigation was to identify surface markers associated with type 2 inflammation.

85 nts in regenerative medicine depends on cell-surface marker-based characterization and/or purificatio

86 histopathologic assessment of autopsy cases, surface marker-based phenotyping of neutrophils and plat

87 biosensor that can identify a specific cell surface marker by targeted (129)Xe MRI.

88 This requires delineating the expression of surface markers by DC subsets among individuals and tiss

89 Additionally the expression of distinct surface markers (CD106, CD162 and myeloperoxidase MPO) w

90 of similar size-AP-1060 and NALM-1-based on surface markers CD13 and HLA-DR.

91 gh Wnt activity was associated with the cell surface markers CD133, CD166, and CD29, but not CD24 and

92 Currently, the cell surface marker CD138 (SDC1) is used for this enrichment,

93 nd boosted IL-4/GM-CSF induced expression of surface markers CD14 and CD86, indicating maturation int

94 ls transduced with a CAR that recognizes the surface marker, CD147, also known as Basigin, can effect

95 12L colocalized to cells that expressed MDSC surface markers CD15+CD33+HLA-DRlo.

96 a from vaccinated infected mice exhibited M2 surface markers (CD16, CD32, CD200, and CD206), moderate

97 in K562 leukemic cells, we identify the cell surface marker CD24 as co-varying with chromatin accessi

98 least five distinct cell states based on two surface markers (CD24 and EPCAM) and provides a gating s

99 IFN-gamma(+) T cells expressed the surface marker CD29 already prior to stimulation.

100 h great thermogenic potential using the cell surface marker CD29.

101 alternatively activated macrophages based on surface marker CD301/C-type lectin domain family 10 memb

102 ding CTNND1 and the early hematopoietic cell surface marker CD34, resulted in reduced leukemic growth

103 ) activity, and down-regulated expression of surface marker CD38 involved in leukemia and lung airway

104 eron-gamma with a unique combination of cell surface markers (CD4(+)CD25(-)CD44(hi)CD62L(lo)) and tra

105 /- 47 nm and expressed the platelet-specific surface marker CD41 and the EV specific markers CD9, CD6

106 The surface marker CD44 has been identified as one of severa

107 m cell-like characteristics express the cell surface marker CD44.

108 xpress IL-10, as well as Tr1-associated cell surface markers, CD49b and LAG-3, and transcription fact

109 s based on the expression of highly specific surface markers CD63 and EpCAM.

110 s between these profiles, we identified cell surface markers, CD69 and CD36, whose genes were differe

111 ata, we defined a novel set of possible cell surface markers (Cd74 and Cd81) for these candidate kidn

112 sed on a variety of phenotypes, such as cell surface markers, cell proliferation and drug response.

113 erized based on their expression of specific surface markers; cell viability was evaluated after inje

114 Specifically, the expression of surface markers characteristic for MZ B cells was altere

115 -gamma(+)CD4(+) T cell population expressing surface markers characteristic of naive-like memory T ce

116 Surface marker characterization showed that CD31(+) EVs

117 Surface marker characterization, gene expression profili

118 ose CITE-sort, an artificial-cell-type aware surface marker clustering method for CITE-seq.

119 pressing population that lacks hematopoietic surface markers, cocultured with AGM AKT-ECs specified i

120 ein expression of TIGIT and FCRL3 as a novel surface marker combination that distinguishes Helios(+)F

121 New surface marker combinations were enriched in transcripti

122 ll line that we termed PC-A, which expressed surface markers common to mesenchymal stromal cells.

123 B cells expressed B surface markers compatible with a marginal zone origin.

124 munotherapy had higher expression of the TH2 surface marker CRTH2 (P = .04) and lower expression of t

125 characterized by the expression of the cell surface marker CXCR4.

126 ha, and IL-1R1; and can be identified by the surface marker CXCR6.

127 ong enriched RISC-bound genes, no effects on surface markers, cytokine expression and PRRSV replicati

128 ith proteins and evaluated for expression of surface markers, cytokine production, and proliferation

129 ndritic cells (DC) through the alteration of surface markers, cytokine secretion, and their ability t

130 Surface markers, cytokines, and transcriptional characte

131 of the ontology in order to classify patient surface marker data into appropriate diagnostic categori

132 d frequencies of MAIT cells, defined by cell surface markers, decline during tuberculosis (TB) diseas

133 ed study has been hampered by a lack of cell surface markers defining tumor-specific dysfunctional TI

134 However, a suitable surface marker distinguishing the phenotypically overlap

135 Forty cell-surface markers, distinguishing all major leukocyte popu

136 proach is that the presence of specific cell surface markers does not directly reflect the transcript

137 ting on various stemness signaling pathways, surface markers, efflux transporters, or components of c

138 cell (CTC) detection strategies rely on cell surface marker EpCAM and intracellular cytokeratins (CKs

139 By using a combination of these surface markers, especially CD30/TNFR2, we identified a

140 CXCL10, CXCL12, CXCL13 and CXCL16) and cell surface marker expression (CD3, CD4 and CXCR3) in periph

141 adherence to plastic inevitably changes the surface marker expression and biological properties of t

142 eral blood, cutaneous mTregs had unique cell surface marker expression and cytokine production.

143 ation, cells were characterized through cell-surface marker expression and lineage-specific different

144 uced differentiation into MPhis with high M2 surface marker expression and production of pro- and ant

145 rilineage differentiation potential and cell surface marker expression as bone marrow hMSCs.

146 ontrol iDCs to WT capsule did not alter cell surface marker expression but did elicit IL-8.

147 (CIMVs-MSCs) and their cytokine content and surface marker expression determined.

148 profiling, TCR repertoire analyses, and cell surface marker expression indicate that Dock2-deficient

149 esigned a flow cytometry panel that utilises surface marker expression observed in standard 2D erythr

150 Surface marker expression of CD11b+ myeloid cells was al

151 regardless of methodology for harvest, cell-surface marker expression of CD73, CD90, CD105, and Stro

152 We used mass cytometry to measure surface marker expression on peripheral NK cells.

153 By comparing the surface marker expression patterns of all identified sub

154 rization which profiles CCSCs based on their surface marker expression phenotypes.

155 Gene and surface marker expression suggest that splenic CD8 cell

156 assified in accordance with their respective surface marker expression via completely distinct Raman

157 but retained memory characteristics, such as surface marker expression, a lower metabolic rate, and i

158 y means of mass cytometry simultaneously for surface marker expression, activation states of intracel

159 roliferation responses, alloreactivity, cell surface marker expression, and antibody production.

160 ll morphology, LPS-induced cytokine profile, surface marker expression, and phagocytosis rate of apop

161 addition, Cardif(-/-) NK cells have altered surface marker expression, lower cytotoxicity, decreased

162 or Embedding and k-means cluster analysis of surface marker expression, that chronic opioid use alter

163 e characterized into subtypes based on their surface marker expression, which affects their prognosis

164 with reduced IL-6 secretion, and normalised surface marker expression.

165 Cell, Prashad et al. (2014) describe a novel surface marker for human fetal liver HSCs, glycosylphosp

166 We further identify CORIN as a cell-surface marker for isolating the TBX5+NKX2-5+ subpopulat

167 In an effort to find a more specific surface marker for malignant SS cells, a microarray anal

168 phere formation, and reexpression of CD24 (a surface marker for non-CSCs), concomitant with an epithe

169 We further identified a cell surface marker for prospective isolation of iNCs, which

170 oteomic approaches to identify specific cell-surface markers for cardiac PW1(+) cells and found that

171 eukin 2, and tumor necrosis factor alpha and surface markers for differentiation (CD127) and anergy (

172 Existing cell surface markers for GSC are developed from embryonic or

173 ecules that have been neglected as potential surface markers for hiPSC-CMs due to significant analyti

174 The commonly used surface markers for human ILC2s leave a majority of type

175 We identified a panel of surface markers for isolation and quantification of the

176 ine triphosphate and ultraviolet/fluorescent surface markers for monitoring.

177 proach facilitates the rational selection of surface markers for prospective isolation of cell subpop

178 Cell-surface markers for prospective isolation of stem cells

179 Thus, we identify novel surface markers for the consistent identification and is

180 ing process, and led to the discovery of new surface markers for the enrichment of iCMs.

181 s activity, viability and expression of cell-surface markers, from tens of thousands of single immune

182 , each of which is characterized by specific surface markers, gene-expression patterns, and distinct

183 To date, the lack of AML-specific surface markers has impeded development of such CAR-base

184 ctional phenotype, because few specific cell surface markers have been identified.

185 basis of the differential expression of cell-surface markers, here we identify a mesenchymal stromal

186 ic and transcriptional profiling, as well as surface marker identification of single circulating tumo

187 haracteristics, including nuclear structure, surface markers, IL-5 independence, and immunoregulatory

188 to the impaired expression of relevant cell surface markers in Eklf(-/-) erythroid cells.

189 ules CXCR6 and CD49a have been identified as surface markers in mice.

190 axioms capturing the expression of cellular surface markers in order to represent types of hematolog

191 Persistence of respective cell surface markers in vitro is confirmed both by flow cytom

192 nses, alloreactivity, and expression of cell surface markers in vitro.

193 consisted of NK cells expressing a range of surface markers, including CD56(hi) and CD56(low) NK cel

194 gramming-prone cells express a unique set of surface markers, including CD73, CD49d and CD200, that a

195 , the PNVs were able to induce expression of surface markers indicative of DC activation and maturati

196 Expression of regulatory B-cell-associated surface markers, interleukin-10, chemokine receptors, an

197 Gene expression analysis identified distinct surface markers like CD226 and revealed that the transcr

198 or the specific recognition of the bacterial surface markers lipopolysaccharide (LPS) and lipoteichoi

199 n based on the expression profiles of 2 cell-surface markers LNGFR (CD271) and THY-1 (CD90).

200 patient tumors to identify three prognostic surface markers (LYPD3, TACSTD2, and LY6D) which correla

201 xosomes share similar characteristics (size, surface marker, miRNA content) with previously described

202 dly upregulate the expression of the NK cell-surface marker NK1.1 in response to MSU crystals but not

203 acrophages have elevated expression of these surface markers, not microglia.

204 rotein A repetitions predominant (GARP) is a surface marker of activated regulatory T cells.

205 We have found that the canonical surface marker of ASCs, CD138 (syndecan-1), which is upr

206 E-selectin is a surface marker of endothelial cell (EC) inflammation, on

207 sion of CD146, a hypoxia down-regulated cell surface marker of human BM-MSCs.

208 cycle progression and can be used as a cell surface marker of myofibroblasts.

209 ransduced with a CAR targeting CD5, a common surface marker of normal and neoplastic T cells, undergo

210 nd identify CD49a (also known as ITGA1) as a surface marker of the beta-cell population, which allows

211 ceptor alpha subunit (IL-11Ralpha) as a cell surface marker of tumor progression that correlates with

212 howed that effector memory pathways and cell surface markers of activation and proliferation in the T

213 in these cell lines simultaneously expressed surface markers of both NE and ML differentiation, confi

214 In addition to identifying surface markers of eHAV vesicles, the results support an

215 sorders, yet there are few, if any, reliable surface markers of eosinophil activation.

216 cytokine production, proliferation, and cell surface markers of immune cells between GA-treated and P

217 Previous attempts to identify surface markers of intermediate cell populations were ba

218 munohistochemistry for CD45, CD3, and CD163, surface markers of leukocytes, T cells, and activated ma

219 Cells with surface markers of long term HSC increased the expressio

220 polysaccharide (LPS)-induced upregulation of surface markers of MDDC maturation and did not prevent L

221 notation, these loci included genes encoding surface markers of myeloid, lymphoid, or hematopoietic s

222 rced the cellular identity, as identified by surface markers, of both cell types.

223 Cell type-specific surface markers offer a powerful tool for purifying defi

224 e, we identify Neogenin-1 (NEO1) as a unique surface marker on a fraction of mouse HSCs labeled with

225 We measured expression of the CD161 surface marker on splenocytes in SHRs and normotensive c

226 The rapid qualitative assessment of surface markers on cancer cells can allow for point-of-c

227 In addition, the loss of CD28 cell surface markers on CD8 + T cells, an indicator of T-cell

228 The contextualization of traditional surface markers on independent morphometric frameworks p

229 ously measure the levels of expression of 24 surface markers on peripheral NK cells from HIV-infected

230 SCs) can be identified by expression of cell surface markers or enzymatic activity, but these methods

231 cellular adhesion, without knowledge of cell-surface markers or intracellular proteins.

232 ing approaches that are limited by available surface markers or selectable metabolic characteristics,

233 They express PDX1, its surrogate surface marker P2RY1, and the bone morphogenetic protein

234 loaded onto exosomes without altering their surface markers, particle size or distribution.

235 orcine alveolar macrophage (PAM) in terms of surface marker phenotype, susceptibility to ASFV infecti

236 teristics such as cell cycle status and cell surface marker phenotype, they respond to different extr

237 was confirmed by examining cytokine and cell surface marker production in bone-marrow-derived dendrit

238 CBSCs possess a unique surface marker profile, including high expression of CD6

239 n high numbers for months and maintain their surface marker profile, indicating that this population

240 re cells characterized by a CD44+/CD24- cell surface marker profile.

241 However, stress had no effect on lymphocyte surface marker profiles in both donor and recipient mice

242 al properties and extensive intracellular or surface marker profiling, comprise promising avenues for

243 ncing (CITE-seq), couples the measurement of surface marker proteins with simultaneous sequencing of

244 Among various surface markers, Rae-1 expression was notably low and TG

245 These cells secrete IL-4 and IFN-gamma, and surface markers revealed significantly elevated frequenc

246 Instead, in a systematic functional surface marker screen, we find that early reprogramming-

247 When combined with high-throughput cell surface marker screening, this approach facilitates the

248 This study identifies FolR1 as a new cell surface marker selectively expressed in mesDA progenitor

249 ical sets of T(EM)-associated genes and cell surface markers shown to be associated with latency reve

250 color flow cytometry panels to determine the surface marker signatures of oral neutrophil subsets in

251 (TICs) often requires screening of multiple surface markers, sometimes with opposite preferences.

252 reliant on the presence of well-defined cell surface markers specific for diverse progenitor populati

253 Although surface markers such as CD133 and CD44 have been success

254 be defined on the basis of the expression of surface markers such as CD34 and hematopoietin receptors

255 These new surface markers, such as CD30 and TNFR2, identified a pr

256 antibodies directed to cancer cell-specific surface markers, such as epithelial cell adhesion molecu

257 Identification of cell surface markers sufficient to purify Treg cells expanded

258 MSC with both endothelial and pericytic cell surface markers suppresses the homing of cancer cells to

259 s purpureas agglutinin (TPA) as a novel cell surface marker that allows for such delineation.

260 g flow cytometry, we identify CD26/DPP4 as a surface marker that allows isolation of this lineage.

261 ause most mammalian cell types lack a single surface marker that distinguishes them from other cells.

262 or superfamily member OX40 (CD134) is a cell surface marker that is highly specific for activated T c

263 We also describe an alternative fibroblast surface marker that more accurately identifies the resid

264 ork identifies a set of novel stage-specific surface markers that can be used as a complement to the

265 e endoderm with the goal of identifying cell surface markers that can be used to track the developmen

266 ated with subclonal mutations, and find cell surface markers that could be used to purify subclones f

267 We identify cell-surface markers that delineate a series of stress erythr

268 gnant cells is challenging in the absence of surface markers that distinguish cancer clones from one

269 In monocytes, we identify host cell surface markers that enable enrichment of latent cells h

270 opulation remains unknown owing to a lack of surface markers that facilitate its prospective isolatio

271 c programs underlying T cell dysfunction and surface markers that predict therapeutic reprogrammabili

272 Upon recognizing the targeted cell-surface marker, the APH enters the host cell via endocyt

273 dentification of lineage- and stage-specific surface markers, the continued identification of differe

274 wever, due to the lack of specific molecular surface markers, this has not yet been successfully acco

275 have significant implications for Ly6C as a surface marker to distinguish functionally distinct CD4(

276 ages, while alphaCD47 blocks CD47 tumor cell surface marker to promote phagocytosis.

277 core-2 O-glycosylation and identified a cell surface marker to quantify Notch signals in multiple imm

278 Further, we identified potential cell surface markers to allow for future identification and c

279 enotypes and the limited predictive value of surface markers to define lineages, functions, or subpop

280 al in part independent of commonly used cell surface markers to discriminate effector and memory T ce

281 wever, been hindered by the lack of reliable surface markers to distinguish and isolate them for subs

282 ombine H2B-GFP-based pulse-chasing with cell-surface markers to distinguish quiescent from proliferat

283 We have used specific cell surface markers to examine the association of NG2 cells

284 We sought to validate a panel of surface markers to prospectively identify cardiac fibrob

285 rried out by quantification of multiple cell surface markers, transcription factors and cytokine prof

286 cytometry to simultaneously measure multiple surface markers, transcription factors, active signaling

287 Human trophoblast cell-surface marker (Trop-2) is a surface glycoprotein origin

288 of heterogeneous subpopulations in its cell surface markers, tumorigenicity, invasion and metastatic

289 Characterizing these cells based only on surface markers using flow cytometry might not provide a

290 rom nonvaccinated infected mice exhibited M1 surface markers, vigorous proliferation, a substantial o

291 A cell-surface marker was identified by comparing the mRNA expr

292 Expression of cell surface markers was assessed by flow cytometry.

293 cell populations from tumours in mice; these surface markers were also expressed on human PD1(hi) tum

294 ndrial membrane potential, and expression of surface markers were determined by using flow cytometry

295 Furthermore, surface markers were grouped into cell-type-specific cat

296 d a germline seminoma that share a CD38 cell-surface marker, which collectively defines likely progre

297 y identified myeloid lineage restricted cell surface marker, which is overexpressed in over 90% of AM

298 CX3CR1, a cell surface marker whose expression is associated with endot

299 Pre-DC share surface markers with plasmacytoid DC (pDC) but have dist

300 To identify novel surface markers with stage-specific expression patterns,