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
Brushed nasal epithelial cells are a surrogate for bronchial epithelial CFTR studies
John J. Brewington, Erin T. Filbrandt, F.J. LaRosa III, Jessica D. Moncivaiz, Alicia J. Ostmann, Lauren M. Strecker, John P. Clancy
John J. Brewington, Erin T. Filbrandt, F.J. LaRosa III, Jessica D. Moncivaiz, Alicia J. Ostmann, Lauren M. Strecker, John P. Clancy
View: Text | PDF
Resource and Technical Advance Pulmonology

Brushed nasal epithelial cells are a surrogate for bronchial epithelial CFTR studies

  • Text
  • PDF
Abstract

Recent advances in the management of cystic fibrosis (CF) target underlying defects in the CF transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) protein, but efficacy analyses remain limited to specific genotype–based subgroups. Patient-derived model systems may therefore aid in expanding access to these drugs. Brushed human nasal epithelial cells (HNEs) are an attractive tissue source, but it remains unclear how faithfully they recapitulate human bronchial epithelial cell (HBE) CFTR activity. We examined this gap using paired, brushed HNE/HBE samples from pediatric CF subjects with a wide variety of CFTR mutations cultured at the air-liquid interface. Growth and structural characteristics for the two cell types were similar, including differentiation into mature respiratory epithelia. In electrophysiologic analysis, no correlation was identified between nasal and bronchial cultures in baseline resistance or epithelial sodium channel (ENaC) activity. Conversely, robust correlation was demonstrated between nasal and bronchial cultures in both stimulated and inhibited CFTR activity. There was close correlation in modulator-induced change in CFTR activity, and CFTR activity in both cell types correlated with in vivo sweat chloride measurements. These data confirm that brushed HNE cell cultures recapitulate the functional CFTR characteristics of HBEs with fidelity and are therefore an appropriate noninvasive HBE surrogate for individualized CFTR analysis.

Authors

John J. Brewington, Erin T. Filbrandt, F.J. LaRosa III, Jessica D. Moncivaiz, Alicia J. Ostmann, Lauren M. Strecker, John P. Clancy

×

Figure 3

There is poor correlation between brushed human nasal epithelial cells (bHNEs and bHBEs) for baseline resistance and epithelial sodium channel (ENaC) activity.

Options: View larger image (or click on image) Download as PowerPoint
There is poor correlation between brushed human nasal epithelial cells (...
Baseline resistance values for bHNE (white bars) and bHBE (gray bars) samples for each subject (A) and aggregate data for all donors (B). ENaC activity (as measured by amiloride-inhibited short-circuit current [Isc]) in bHNE (white bars) and bHBE (gray bars) samples for each subject (C) and aggregate data for all donors (D). (E) Baseline resistance in bHNE (x axis) and bHBE (y axis) is plotted for each subject; linear regression was nonsignificant. (F) ENaC activity is similarly plotted, with no significant correlation. n = 3–6 inserts per sample and condition; individual replicates are noted by circles in A and C to demonstrate distribution. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001, ****P < 0.0001. Two-way ANOVA with Tukey’s correction for multiple comparisons was used for A and C, while unpaired, 2-sided t tests were used for B and D. Individual sample labels correlate with donor codes shown in Table 1. Error bars in A, C, E, and F represent SEM. Boxes in B and D represent median (center line), 25th and 75th quartiles (box limits), and minimum/maximum (whiskers) values.

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

Sign up for email alerts