Effect of anti-IgM on eIF expression and comparison with normal B cells. (A-B) CLL samples (n = 12) were stimulated with anti-IgM beads or control beads, or were left untreated. After 24 hours, expression of eIF4A, eIF4GI, eIF3B, PDCD4, and HSC70 (loading control) was analyzed by immunoblotting. (A) Representative immunoblot. (B) Quantitation of multiple experiments; the graph shows normalized expression (means ± SEM) relative to control beads. Statistical comparisons between groups are shown (Student t test). (C) PBMCs from healthy donors (n = 7) were treated with soluble anti-IgM or anti-IgM beads, control antibodies, CpG-ODN2006 or left untreated for 24 hours before OPP labeling. The graphs show fold increase in OPP labeling (means ± SEM) in B (CD19⁺CD5^–) and T cells (CD19^–CD5⁺), with values for untreated B cells set to 1.0 for each donor. Statistical comparisons between groups are shown (Student t test). (D-E) Normal B cells (n = 5) were isolated from PBMCs by negative selection and stimulated with soluble anti-IgM or control antibody, or were left untreated as a control, for 24 hours. Expression of eIF4A, eIF4GI, eIF3B, PDCD4, and HSC70 were analyzed by immunoblotting. (D) Representative immunoblot. (E) Quantification of multiple experiments; the graph shows normalized expression (means ± SEM) relative to control beads. Statistical comparisons between groups are shown (Student t test).