Go to The Journal of Clinical Investigation
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Transfers
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
  • Physician-Scientist Development
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • By specialty
    • COVID-19
    • Cardiology
    • Immunology
    • Metabolism
    • Nephrology
    • Oncology
    • Pulmonology
    • All ...
  • Videos
  • Collections
    • In-Press Preview
    • Resource and Technical Advances
    • Clinical Research and Public Health
    • Research Letters
    • Editorials
    • Perspectives
    • Physician-Scientist Development
    • Reviews
    • Top read articles

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Specialties
  • In-Press Preview
  • Resource and Technical Advances
  • Clinical Research and Public Health
  • Research Letters
  • Editorials
  • Perspectives
  • Physician-Scientist Development
  • Reviews
  • Top read articles
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Transfers
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
An at-home blood collection device for remote immune monitoring by high-parameter flow cytometry
Andrew J. Konecny, Fang Yun Lim, Eva Domenjo-Vila, Erika Lovas, Rachel L. Blazevic, Louise E. Kimball, Michael Boeckh, Alpana Waghmare, Martin Prlic
Andrew J. Konecny, Fang Yun Lim, Eva Domenjo-Vila, Erika Lovas, Rachel L. Blazevic, Louise E. Kimball, Michael Boeckh, Alpana Waghmare, Martin Prlic
View: Text | PDF
Research Article Cell biology Clinical Research Immunology

An at-home blood collection device for remote immune monitoring by high-parameter flow cytometry

  • Text
  • PDF
Abstract

At-home blood collection devices (ABCDs) can facilitate study participation for remote and rural cohorts. Previous studies used ABCDs to interrogate samples by proteomics and sequencing approaches. We wanted to address the question of whether this approach could be used to assess live immune cells with high-parameter flow cytometry to enable remote immune monitoring. We first compared blood from standard venipuncture with ABCD blood draws, followed by assessment of the impact of sample shipping on immune cell viability and phenotyping. We found that capillary blood collected with a Tasso+ device and concurrently drawn venipuncture blood samples had highly congruent immune cell composition and phenotype. Shipment of Tasso+ samples via the United States Postal Service altered the myeloid compartment, but T cell numbers, subsets, and phenotypes remained remarkably stable compared with non-shipped samples. Finally, we describe a flow cytometry analysis framework that allowed for direct sample comparison even when samples were stained and analyzed over a time period of 1.5 years. Overall, our data highlight the feasibility of using ABCDs combined with subsequent flow cytometry analysis for remote immune monitoring. Additionally, our study also identifies areas that could be improved to further promote the use of ABCDs for immune monitoring.

Authors

Andrew J. Konecny, Fang Yun Lim, Eva Domenjo-Vila, Erika Lovas, Rachel L. Blazevic, Louise E. Kimball, Michael Boeckh, Alpana Waghmare, Martin Prlic

×

Figure 2

Composition and phenotype of immune cells vary with different blood-processing protocols.

Options: View larger image (or click on image) Download as PowerPoint
Composition and phenotype of immune cells vary with different blood-proc...
(A–F) Blood obtained from the same venipuncture blood draw was split and processed by both ACK lysis to produce a whole sample (Vein ACK) and by Ficoll density gradient to produce a PBMC sample (Vein PBMC). (A) Quantification and representative plot of B cells as a frequency of CD45+ non-neutrophils (n = 16). (B) Quantification and representative plot of naive conventional CD4+ T cells as a frequency of conventional CD4+ T cells (n = 16). (C–F) High-quality samples were used for phenotyping analysis: samples with greater than 70% viability and subsets where there were 20 or more cells. Memory conventional CD4+ T cells (n = 16), cDCs (n = 15), and monocytes (n = 16). (C and D) Quantification and representative plot of CD25 (C) and CD161 (D) on memory conventional CD4+ T cells. (E) Quantification and representative plot of CD11b on cDCs. (F) Quantification and representative plot of CD206 on monocytes. Data shown are from 2 independent experiments. Statistical analyses were performed using Wilcoxon’s signed-rank test.

Copyright © 2026 American Society for Clinical Investigation
ISSN 2379-3708

Sign up for email alerts