CBA versus flowcytomix

richard.konz@pharma.novartis.com richard.konz at pharma.novartis.com
Wed Jun 9 09:58:08 EST 2004


Dear Manuel:

I've been using the BD Biosciences CBA kits for quite some time and have 
been very pleased with the overall ease of running samples and analyzing 
the data
on the CBA software.  I have been using the CBA Human TH1/TH2 Kit II 
[IL-2,4,6,10, TNFa, IFNg] kit for the past six months to evaluate 
activated T cell  cytokine
production and was extremely pleased with the sensitivity and 
reproducibility from assay to assay and kit to kit.

Contact me directly if you need further information.  Hope this helps.

Best regards,

-Rich

Richard F. Konz, Jr.
Senior Scientist
Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Inc.
HT Flow Cytometry Facility
Functional Genomics
100 Technology Square
Cambridge, MA  02139
Office: 617-871-3238
Lab: 617-871-7339
Fax: 617-871-7053
email:	richard.konz at pharma.novartis.com




Manuel Comabella Lopez <mcomabel at vhebron.net>
06/08/2004 10:12 AM

	To:	Cytometry Mailing List <cytometry at flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu>
	cc: 
	Subject:	CBA versus flowcytomix


Dear Flowers,
We are highly interested in setting up the determination of several
cytokines in supernatants from cell cultures. We are awared of two
commercially available		 flow cytometry based kits that work on a 
similar
way: the CBA from Becton Dickinson, and the Flowcytomix from Bender
MedSystems (Innogenetics). Could anyone enlighten us about which one
works better in terms of user-friendliness, sensitivity, and
reproducibility?

Best regards,
Manuel Comabella
Clinical Neuroimmunology Unit
Vall Hebron Hospital
Barcelona
Spain




-------------- next part --------------
HTML attachment scrubbed and removed


More information about the Cytometry mailing list