Table 2. Linking anti-sIg stimuli in HCL to downstream effects on tumor apoptosis.
| % Cells apoptotic | ||||||||
| sIg | Assay 1 | Assay 2 | ||||||
| Case | Status | sIg Phenotype | Functional BCR sIg | StimulatingAntibody | 2 hours | 3 hours | 2 hours | 3 hours |
| 3 | D-ve | IgG, IgM, kappa | IgG, kappa | CON (IgD) | ND | 5.65 | ND | 7.79 |
| IgG | ND | 25.43*** | ND | 33.70**** | ||||
| kappa | ND | 23.40**** | ND | 23.63**** | ||||
| 5 | D-ve | IgA, IgG, IgM, kappa, lambda | IgA, lambda | CON (IgD) | 6.93 | 6.28 | ND | ND |
| IgA | 19.45**** | 12.80**** | ND | ND | ||||
| lambda | 14.70**** | 16.83**** | ND | ND | ||||
| 10 | D-ve | IgA, IgG, IgM, lambda | IgG, lambda | CON (IgD) | 9.13 | 9.50 | 12.60 | 9.50 |
| IgG | 21.48**** | 29.20**** | 29.23*** | 32.10*** | ||||
| lambda | 23.98**** | 23.10*** | 24.45*** | 28.75**** | ||||
| CON#10 (IgA) | ND | 14.02 | ND | 10.40 | ||||
| IgG#10 | ND | 17.82* | ND | 16.52*** | ||||
| CON#20 (IgA) | ND | 14.04 | ND | 13.58 | ||||
| IgG#20 | ND | 23.68*** | ND | 18.68*** | ||||
| 11 | D-ve | IgA, IgG, IgM, kappa | IgG, kappa | CON (IgD) | 20.78 | 21.10 | 20.60 | ND |
| IgG | 35.53**** | 34.08**** | 32.83**** | ND | ||||
| kappa | 39.65*** | 41.53**** | 38.55** | ND | ||||
| 13 | D+ve | IgA, IgD, IgG, IgM,kappa, lambda | IgD, IgM, IgG, lambda,kappa | CON (IgA) | ND | 5.63 | ND | 4.58 |
| IgD | ND | 5.93ns | ND | 4.33ns | ||||
| IgM | ND | 8.95*** | ND | 5.50*** | ||||
Data were analysed in PRISM using Student’s t-test with Welch’s correction. P-values are denoted as: ns>0.05,
*
0.01–0.05,
**
0.01–0.001,
***
0.001–0.0001,
****
<0.0001.