Figure 4.
Comparing CD200 expression in low-risk and risk ALL. (A) Cells from 25 MRD low-risk ALL patients (1-3, 5, 6, 8, 14, 23, 25, 30-32, 34-43, 51, 59) (panel Ai) and 17 risk ALL patients (9, 12, 13, 22, 24, 27-29, 33, 44-50, 60) (panel Aii) were stained for CD34 and CD19 and gated into CD34+/CD19+, CD34+/CD19–, CD34–/CD19+ and CD34–/CD19– populations; the proportion of CD200 was then determined. Each symbol represents a different patient, and horizontal lines represent the median. (B) In a subset of patients with 5 MRD low-risk patients (34, 42, 43, 51, 59) and 8 MRD risk patients (28, 33, 44-47, 50, 60), both CD200 expression (Bi) and number of binding sites (Bii) were calculated. Bars represent median expression, and error bars represent the interquartile range.

Comparing CD200 expression in low-risk and risk ALL. (A) Cells from 25 MRD low-risk ALL patients (1-3, 5, 6, 8, 14, 23, 25, 30-32, 34-43, 51, 59) (panel Ai) and 17 risk ALL patients (9, 12, 13, 22, 24, 27-29, 33, 44-50, 60) (panel Aii) were stained for CD34 and CD19 and gated into CD34+/CD19+, CD34+/CD19, CD34/CD19+ and CD34/CD19 populations; the proportion of CD200 was then determined. Each symbol represents a different patient, and horizontal lines represent the median. (B) In a subset of patients with 5 MRD low-risk patients (34, 42, 43, 51, 59) and 8 MRD risk patients (28, 33, 44-47, 50, 60), both CD200 expression (Bi) and number of binding sites (Bii) were calculated. Bars represent median expression, and error bars represent the interquartile range.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal