Fig. 3

Absolute number of circulating CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T cell subsets in young (n = 10) and elderly end stage renal disease (ESRD) patients (n = 21) with a skewed TCR Vβ repertoire compared to age-matched ESRD patients without a skewed TCR Vβ repertoire (young n = 11; elderly n = 3). A typical example of the gating strategy for dissection of the different T cell subsets by flow cytometry following a whole blood staining protocol is given in a. Briefly, lymphocytes were identified based on the forward/sideward characteristics followed by the selection of CD3⁺ T cells. These CD3⁺ T cells were then dissected into CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T cells. CCR7 and CD45RO were used to identify the CD4⁺ T cells subsets. Furthermore, CD28⁻ T cells were examined within the total CD4⁺ population. A similar gating strategy was employed for determination of absolute numbers of CD8⁺ T cell subsets and the differentiation status. The number of (b) CD4⁺, (c) CD4⁺ naive, (d) CD4⁺ total memory, (e) CD4⁺ central memory (CM), (f) CD4⁺ effector memory (EM), (g) CD4⁺ highly differentiated effector T cells (EMRA), (h) CD4⁺CD28⁻ T cells, as well as (i) CD8⁺, (j) CD8⁺ naive, (k) CD8⁺ total memory, (l) CD8⁺ central memory (CM), (m) CD8⁺ effector memory (EM), (n) CD8⁺ highly differentiated effector T cells (EMRA) and (o) CD8⁺CD28⁻ T cells are shown. Data are given as median with interquartile range. The open bars represent ESRD patients with a non-skewed TCR Vβ repertoire and closed bars correspond to ESRD patients with a skewed TCR Vβ repertoire. P value: * < 0.05; ** < 0.01; *** < 0.001; NS: not significant