Review



m1 mdms  (PromoCell)


Bioz Verified Symbol PromoCell is a verified supplier
Bioz Manufacturer Symbol PromoCell manufactures this product  
  • Logo
  • About
  • News
  • Press Release
  • Team
  • Advisors
  • Partners
  • Contact
  • Bioz Stars
  • Bioz vStars
    • 93
      Buy from Supplier

    Structured Review

    PromoCell m1 mdms
    RNA‐sequencing (RNA‐seq) analysis shows that IFN‐λ4 confers a modified <t>M1</t> phenotype on monocyte‐derived macrophages <t>(MDMs).</t> MDMs differentiated from CD14+ monocytes (as shown in Fig. ) from a single donor were subjected to paired‐end RNA‐seq analysis. Duplicate samples that had mock or IFN‐λ4 treatment during differentiation with GM‐CSF were used. ( A ) Volcano plot showing the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in IFN‐λ4‐treated MDMs compared with untreated cells; a cut‐off of 1.5‐fold change and P = 0.05 were used. ( B ) Heatmap of the top 100 up‐ and down‐regulated DEGs are shown, with duplicate IFN‐λ4‐treated and mock‐treated samples in different colors. Some of the important genes are shown on the right (also included in Table ). ( C ) Reactome pathway enrichment analysis bubble plot of the DEGs (IFN‐λ4 vs. mock) showing the top four most affected pathways
    M1 Mdms, supplied by PromoCell, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 24 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/m1 mdms/product/PromoCell
    Average 93 stars, based on 24 article reviews
    m1 mdms - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    93/100 stars

    Images

    1) Product Images from "Monocytes differentiated into macrophages and dendritic cells in the presence of human IFN‐λ3 or IFN‐λ4 show distinct phenotypes"

    Article Title: Monocytes differentiated into macrophages and dendritic cells in the presence of human IFN‐λ3 or IFN‐λ4 show distinct phenotypes

    Journal: Journal of Leukocyte Biology

    doi: 10.1002/JLB.3A0120-001RRR

    RNA‐sequencing (RNA‐seq) analysis shows that IFN‐λ4 confers a modified M1 phenotype on monocyte‐derived macrophages (MDMs). MDMs differentiated from CD14+ monocytes (as shown in Fig. ) from a single donor were subjected to paired‐end RNA‐seq analysis. Duplicate samples that had mock or IFN‐λ4 treatment during differentiation with GM‐CSF were used. ( A ) Volcano plot showing the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in IFN‐λ4‐treated MDMs compared with untreated cells; a cut‐off of 1.5‐fold change and P = 0.05 were used. ( B ) Heatmap of the top 100 up‐ and down‐regulated DEGs are shown, with duplicate IFN‐λ4‐treated and mock‐treated samples in different colors. Some of the important genes are shown on the right (also included in Table ). ( C ) Reactome pathway enrichment analysis bubble plot of the DEGs (IFN‐λ4 vs. mock) showing the top four most affected pathways
    Figure Legend Snippet: RNA‐sequencing (RNA‐seq) analysis shows that IFN‐λ4 confers a modified M1 phenotype on monocyte‐derived macrophages (MDMs). MDMs differentiated from CD14+ monocytes (as shown in Fig. ) from a single donor were subjected to paired‐end RNA‐seq analysis. Duplicate samples that had mock or IFN‐λ4 treatment during differentiation with GM‐CSF were used. ( A ) Volcano plot showing the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in IFN‐λ4‐treated MDMs compared with untreated cells; a cut‐off of 1.5‐fold change and P = 0.05 were used. ( B ) Heatmap of the top 100 up‐ and down‐regulated DEGs are shown, with duplicate IFN‐λ4‐treated and mock‐treated samples in different colors. Some of the important genes are shown on the right (also included in Table ). ( C ) Reactome pathway enrichment analysis bubble plot of the DEGs (IFN‐λ4 vs. mock) showing the top four most affected pathways

    Techniques Used: RNA Sequencing Assay, Modification, Derivative Assay

    Recombinant IFN‐λ3 shows superior specific activity compared to recombinant IFN‐λ4 in IFN‐stimulated genes (ISGs) stimulation in various cell types. ( A ) A range of concentrations were tested for the two cytokines in A549 (left; procedure followed same as in Fig. ) and PMA‐differentiated THP‐1 cells (right; THP‐1 cells were treated with PMA for 48 h and then treated with IFN‐λ3 or IFN‐λ4 for 24 h) and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) was carried out to measure the ISG expression. (b) Western blot showing the expression of pSTAT1 in M2‐monocyte‐derived macrophage (MDM) cells generated from human PBMC‐derived CD14 + cells (obtained by negative selection) as described in Section 2 (“Materials and Methods”). ( C ) ISG stimulation activity of IFN‐λ3 and IFN‐λ4 was tested at the given concentrations in in vitro generated monocyte‐derived dendritic cells (MoDCs) and M1‐MDMs from a single donor as described in Section 2 (CD14 + monocytes were isolated from PBMCs of a healthy volunteer by positive selection for experiments shown in ( C ) as described in Section 2. For A and C : The data show mean from technical triplicates from one experiment with error bars depicting sd
    Figure Legend Snippet: Recombinant IFN‐λ3 shows superior specific activity compared to recombinant IFN‐λ4 in IFN‐stimulated genes (ISGs) stimulation in various cell types. ( A ) A range of concentrations were tested for the two cytokines in A549 (left; procedure followed same as in Fig. ) and PMA‐differentiated THP‐1 cells (right; THP‐1 cells were treated with PMA for 48 h and then treated with IFN‐λ3 or IFN‐λ4 for 24 h) and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) was carried out to measure the ISG expression. (b) Western blot showing the expression of pSTAT1 in M2‐monocyte‐derived macrophage (MDM) cells generated from human PBMC‐derived CD14 + cells (obtained by negative selection) as described in Section 2 (“Materials and Methods”). ( C ) ISG stimulation activity of IFN‐λ3 and IFN‐λ4 was tested at the given concentrations in in vitro generated monocyte‐derived dendritic cells (MoDCs) and M1‐MDMs from a single donor as described in Section 2 (CD14 + monocytes were isolated from PBMCs of a healthy volunteer by positive selection for experiments shown in ( C ) as described in Section 2. For A and C : The data show mean from technical triplicates from one experiment with error bars depicting sd

    Techniques Used: Recombinant, Activity Assay, Real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction, Expressing, Western Blot, Derivative Assay, Generated, Selection, In Vitro, Isolation

    Monocyte‐derived macrophages (MDMs) differentiated in the presence of IFN‐λ3 or IFN‐λ4 show altered cytokine secretion. ( A ) Activated M1‐MDMs differentiated in the presence of IFN‐λ4 show lower IL‐1β and higher IL‐10 secretion. CD14 + cells obtained from five independent donors were differentiated into M1‐MDMs and stimulated with LPS (as per scheme in Fig. ), and cytokine secretion was measured by ELISA. The data show mean values from five independent donors with error bars representing sd . Filled circles and filled triangles represent MDMs derived from each of the five donors (in different colors) differentiated without and with IFN‐λ4 respectively, joined by a trend line. A 1‐tailed t ‐test for two dependent means was carried out to calculate statistical significance. * P < 0.05; ns, not significant. ( B ) Cytokine profiles of activated M1‐ and M2‐MDMs differentiated in the presence of IFN‐λ3 or IFN‐λ4. The data show mean values from four independent donors with error bars representing sd . CD14 + cells from each donor were split into three aliquots and differentiated into M1‐ or M2‐MDMs in the absence or presence of IFN‐λ3 or IFN‐λ4; after activation with LPS, cytokines were collected from supernatants and measured by ELISA. A 2‐tailed t ‐test for two independent means was used to calculate statistical significance; only significant comparisons are shown; * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001, **** P < 0.0001
    Figure Legend Snippet: Monocyte‐derived macrophages (MDMs) differentiated in the presence of IFN‐λ3 or IFN‐λ4 show altered cytokine secretion. ( A ) Activated M1‐MDMs differentiated in the presence of IFN‐λ4 show lower IL‐1β and higher IL‐10 secretion. CD14 + cells obtained from five independent donors were differentiated into M1‐MDMs and stimulated with LPS (as per scheme in Fig. ), and cytokine secretion was measured by ELISA. The data show mean values from five independent donors with error bars representing sd . Filled circles and filled triangles represent MDMs derived from each of the five donors (in different colors) differentiated without and with IFN‐λ4 respectively, joined by a trend line. A 1‐tailed t ‐test for two dependent means was carried out to calculate statistical significance. * P < 0.05; ns, not significant. ( B ) Cytokine profiles of activated M1‐ and M2‐MDMs differentiated in the presence of IFN‐λ3 or IFN‐λ4. The data show mean values from four independent donors with error bars representing sd . CD14 + cells from each donor were split into three aliquots and differentiated into M1‐ or M2‐MDMs in the absence or presence of IFN‐λ3 or IFN‐λ4; after activation with LPS, cytokines were collected from supernatants and measured by ELISA. A 2‐tailed t ‐test for two independent means was used to calculate statistical significance; only significant comparisons are shown; * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001, **** P < 0.0001

    Techniques Used: Derivative Assay, Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay, Activation Assay



    Similar Products

    m1 mdms  (PromoCell)
    93
    PromoCell m1 mdms
    RNA‐sequencing (RNA‐seq) analysis shows that IFN‐λ4 confers a modified <t>M1</t> phenotype on monocyte‐derived macrophages <t>(MDMs).</t> MDMs differentiated from CD14+ monocytes (as shown in Fig. ) from a single donor were subjected to paired‐end RNA‐seq analysis. Duplicate samples that had mock or IFN‐λ4 treatment during differentiation with GM‐CSF were used. ( A ) Volcano plot showing the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in IFN‐λ4‐treated MDMs compared with untreated cells; a cut‐off of 1.5‐fold change and P = 0.05 were used. ( B ) Heatmap of the top 100 up‐ and down‐regulated DEGs are shown, with duplicate IFN‐λ4‐treated and mock‐treated samples in different colors. Some of the important genes are shown on the right (also included in Table ). ( C ) Reactome pathway enrichment analysis bubble plot of the DEGs (IFN‐λ4 vs. mock) showing the top four most affected pathways
    M1 Mdms, supplied by PromoCell, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/m1 mdms/product/PromoCell
    Average 93 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    m1 mdms - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    93/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier

    Image Search Results


    RNA‐sequencing (RNA‐seq) analysis shows that IFN‐λ4 confers a modified M1 phenotype on monocyte‐derived macrophages (MDMs). MDMs differentiated from CD14+ monocytes (as shown in Fig. ) from a single donor were subjected to paired‐end RNA‐seq analysis. Duplicate samples that had mock or IFN‐λ4 treatment during differentiation with GM‐CSF were used. ( A ) Volcano plot showing the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in IFN‐λ4‐treated MDMs compared with untreated cells; a cut‐off of 1.5‐fold change and P = 0.05 were used. ( B ) Heatmap of the top 100 up‐ and down‐regulated DEGs are shown, with duplicate IFN‐λ4‐treated and mock‐treated samples in different colors. Some of the important genes are shown on the right (also included in Table ). ( C ) Reactome pathway enrichment analysis bubble plot of the DEGs (IFN‐λ4 vs. mock) showing the top four most affected pathways

    Journal: Journal of Leukocyte Biology

    Article Title: Monocytes differentiated into macrophages and dendritic cells in the presence of human IFN‐λ3 or IFN‐λ4 show distinct phenotypes

    doi: 10.1002/JLB.3A0120-001RRR

    Figure Lengend Snippet: RNA‐sequencing (RNA‐seq) analysis shows that IFN‐λ4 confers a modified M1 phenotype on monocyte‐derived macrophages (MDMs). MDMs differentiated from CD14+ monocytes (as shown in Fig. ) from a single donor were subjected to paired‐end RNA‐seq analysis. Duplicate samples that had mock or IFN‐λ4 treatment during differentiation with GM‐CSF were used. ( A ) Volcano plot showing the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in IFN‐λ4‐treated MDMs compared with untreated cells; a cut‐off of 1.5‐fold change and P = 0.05 were used. ( B ) Heatmap of the top 100 up‐ and down‐regulated DEGs are shown, with duplicate IFN‐λ4‐treated and mock‐treated samples in different colors. Some of the important genes are shown on the right (also included in Table ). ( C ) Reactome pathway enrichment analysis bubble plot of the DEGs (IFN‐λ4 vs. mock) showing the top four most affected pathways

    Article Snippet: CD14 + cells from four more donors (PromoCell) were differentiated into M1‐MDMs in the presence or absence of IFN‐λ4 and further stimulated with LPS, and the expression of some important cytokines were assessed by ELISA (Fig. ).

    Techniques: RNA Sequencing Assay, Modification, Derivative Assay

    Recombinant IFN‐λ3 shows superior specific activity compared to recombinant IFN‐λ4 in IFN‐stimulated genes (ISGs) stimulation in various cell types. ( A ) A range of concentrations were tested for the two cytokines in A549 (left; procedure followed same as in Fig. ) and PMA‐differentiated THP‐1 cells (right; THP‐1 cells were treated with PMA for 48 h and then treated with IFN‐λ3 or IFN‐λ4 for 24 h) and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) was carried out to measure the ISG expression. (b) Western blot showing the expression of pSTAT1 in M2‐monocyte‐derived macrophage (MDM) cells generated from human PBMC‐derived CD14 + cells (obtained by negative selection) as described in Section 2 (“Materials and Methods”). ( C ) ISG stimulation activity of IFN‐λ3 and IFN‐λ4 was tested at the given concentrations in in vitro generated monocyte‐derived dendritic cells (MoDCs) and M1‐MDMs from a single donor as described in Section 2 (CD14 + monocytes were isolated from PBMCs of a healthy volunteer by positive selection for experiments shown in ( C ) as described in Section 2. For A and C : The data show mean from technical triplicates from one experiment with error bars depicting sd

    Journal: Journal of Leukocyte Biology

    Article Title: Monocytes differentiated into macrophages and dendritic cells in the presence of human IFN‐λ3 or IFN‐λ4 show distinct phenotypes

    doi: 10.1002/JLB.3A0120-001RRR

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Recombinant IFN‐λ3 shows superior specific activity compared to recombinant IFN‐λ4 in IFN‐stimulated genes (ISGs) stimulation in various cell types. ( A ) A range of concentrations were tested for the two cytokines in A549 (left; procedure followed same as in Fig. ) and PMA‐differentiated THP‐1 cells (right; THP‐1 cells were treated with PMA for 48 h and then treated with IFN‐λ3 or IFN‐λ4 for 24 h) and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) was carried out to measure the ISG expression. (b) Western blot showing the expression of pSTAT1 in M2‐monocyte‐derived macrophage (MDM) cells generated from human PBMC‐derived CD14 + cells (obtained by negative selection) as described in Section 2 (“Materials and Methods”). ( C ) ISG stimulation activity of IFN‐λ3 and IFN‐λ4 was tested at the given concentrations in in vitro generated monocyte‐derived dendritic cells (MoDCs) and M1‐MDMs from a single donor as described in Section 2 (CD14 + monocytes were isolated from PBMCs of a healthy volunteer by positive selection for experiments shown in ( C ) as described in Section 2. For A and C : The data show mean from technical triplicates from one experiment with error bars depicting sd

    Article Snippet: CD14 + cells from four more donors (PromoCell) were differentiated into M1‐MDMs in the presence or absence of IFN‐λ4 and further stimulated with LPS, and the expression of some important cytokines were assessed by ELISA (Fig. ).

    Techniques: Recombinant, Activity Assay, Real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction, Expressing, Western Blot, Derivative Assay, Generated, Selection, In Vitro, Isolation

    Monocyte‐derived macrophages (MDMs) differentiated in the presence of IFN‐λ3 or IFN‐λ4 show altered cytokine secretion. ( A ) Activated M1‐MDMs differentiated in the presence of IFN‐λ4 show lower IL‐1β and higher IL‐10 secretion. CD14 + cells obtained from five independent donors were differentiated into M1‐MDMs and stimulated with LPS (as per scheme in Fig. ), and cytokine secretion was measured by ELISA. The data show mean values from five independent donors with error bars representing sd . Filled circles and filled triangles represent MDMs derived from each of the five donors (in different colors) differentiated without and with IFN‐λ4 respectively, joined by a trend line. A 1‐tailed t ‐test for two dependent means was carried out to calculate statistical significance. * P < 0.05; ns, not significant. ( B ) Cytokine profiles of activated M1‐ and M2‐MDMs differentiated in the presence of IFN‐λ3 or IFN‐λ4. The data show mean values from four independent donors with error bars representing sd . CD14 + cells from each donor were split into three aliquots and differentiated into M1‐ or M2‐MDMs in the absence or presence of IFN‐λ3 or IFN‐λ4; after activation with LPS, cytokines were collected from supernatants and measured by ELISA. A 2‐tailed t ‐test for two independent means was used to calculate statistical significance; only significant comparisons are shown; * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001, **** P < 0.0001

    Journal: Journal of Leukocyte Biology

    Article Title: Monocytes differentiated into macrophages and dendritic cells in the presence of human IFN‐λ3 or IFN‐λ4 show distinct phenotypes

    doi: 10.1002/JLB.3A0120-001RRR

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Monocyte‐derived macrophages (MDMs) differentiated in the presence of IFN‐λ3 or IFN‐λ4 show altered cytokine secretion. ( A ) Activated M1‐MDMs differentiated in the presence of IFN‐λ4 show lower IL‐1β and higher IL‐10 secretion. CD14 + cells obtained from five independent donors were differentiated into M1‐MDMs and stimulated with LPS (as per scheme in Fig. ), and cytokine secretion was measured by ELISA. The data show mean values from five independent donors with error bars representing sd . Filled circles and filled triangles represent MDMs derived from each of the five donors (in different colors) differentiated without and with IFN‐λ4 respectively, joined by a trend line. A 1‐tailed t ‐test for two dependent means was carried out to calculate statistical significance. * P < 0.05; ns, not significant. ( B ) Cytokine profiles of activated M1‐ and M2‐MDMs differentiated in the presence of IFN‐λ3 or IFN‐λ4. The data show mean values from four independent donors with error bars representing sd . CD14 + cells from each donor were split into three aliquots and differentiated into M1‐ or M2‐MDMs in the absence or presence of IFN‐λ3 or IFN‐λ4; after activation with LPS, cytokines were collected from supernatants and measured by ELISA. A 2‐tailed t ‐test for two independent means was used to calculate statistical significance; only significant comparisons are shown; * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001, **** P < 0.0001

    Article Snippet: CD14 + cells from four more donors (PromoCell) were differentiated into M1‐MDMs in the presence or absence of IFN‐λ4 and further stimulated with LPS, and the expression of some important cytokines were assessed by ELISA (Fig. ).

    Techniques: Derivative Assay, Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay, Activation Assay