Proof without prejudice revisited: Immunofluorescence histogram analysis using cumulative frequency subtraction plus ratio analysis of means

Authors
Citation
Jv. Watson, Proof without prejudice revisited: Immunofluorescence histogram analysis using cumulative frequency subtraction plus ratio analysis of means, CYTOMETRY, 43(1), 2001, pp. 55-68
Citations number
18
Categorie Soggetti
Medical Research Diagnosis & Treatment
Journal title
CYTOMETRY
ISSN journal
01964763 → ACNP
Volume
43
Issue
1
Year of publication
2001
Pages
55 - 68
Database
ISI
SICI code
0196-4763(20010101)43:1<55:PWPRIH>2.0.ZU;2-I
Abstract
Background: Apart from the work of Lampariello and colleagues (Cytometry 15 :294-301, 1994; Cytometry 32: 241-254, 1998), very little analytical work h as been carried out for analysis of immunofluorescence distributions contai ning an overlapping mixture of labeled and unlabeled cells. The methods dev eloped tend to rely on fitting theoretical distributions to the relevant po pulations. However, the method described here attempts to produce an analyt ical solution. Methods: A new method for immunofluorescence histogram analysis is presente d. It uses cumulative frequency distribution subtraction of the test sample from the control to predict the mean of a labeled cell component embedded within a histogram containing unlabeled cells. Ratio analysis of means (RAM ) was then carried out to calculate the labeled fraction. The results were submitted to Kolmogorov-Smirnov analysis and Student's t-test for validatio n at a given level of probability. Results: The method was developed with a data set ex hibiting a small "posi tive" shoulder, which was predicted to contain a labeled fraction comprisin g 8.0% of the total at the 99% confidence limit. It was then tested with da ta analyzed and published previously where the Johnson Su family of distrib utions was used in curve fitting. Conclusions: There was good agreement between the known and predicted propo rtions of labeled cells. However, the method is dependent on the symmetry o f the distributions. Some minor systematic errors were encountered due, in part, to skewed experimental distributions. Cytometry 43:55-68, 2001. (C) 2 001 Wiley-Liss,Inc.