Conclusions
These results demonstrate the feasibility of culturing cells and quantifying the inflammatory response to challenge outside the laboratory, with a wide range of potential applications in biobehavioral research in community-based and remote field settings.
Methods
We evaluated the performance of both protocols against a standard laboratory-based protocol using matched venous and capillary blood samples collected from young adults (n = 24). Samples were incubated with lipopolysaccharide and hydrocortisone, and the production of proinflammatory cytokines interleukin 1β, interleukin 6, and tumor necrosis factor α was measured in response.
Objective
Field-based research on inflammation and health is typically limited to baseline measures of circulating cytokines or acute-phase proteins, whereas laboratory-based studies can pursue a more dynamic approach with ex vivo cell culture
Results
Comparisons indicate a high level of agreement in responses across the protocols and culture conditions. The overall correlation in results was 0.88 between the standard and small-volume protocols and 0.86 between the standard and capillary blood protocols. Repeatability for the small-volume and capillary blood protocols was high, with mean coefficients of variation across five replicates of 6.2% and 5.4%, respectively. Conclusions: These results demonstrate the feasibility of culturing cells and quantifying the inflammatory response to challenge outside the laboratory, with a wide range of potential applications in biobehavioral research in community-based and remote field settings.