Whole blood cytokine release assays reveal disparity between capillary blood sampling methods

Abstract

IntroductionThe use of whole blood in rapid cytokine release assays (CRAs) is becoming an established technique for screening immune responses following natural infection or vaccination, especially in the context of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Establishing an accurate capillary blood sampling method to replace the need for venipuncture could make CRAs more accessible. In this study, capillary blood was collected via two different methods alongside traditional venipuncture to investigate whether the method of blood draw affects cytokine quantification when performing CRAs. MethodsAdults previously vaccinated with SARS-CoV-2 vaccines donated three blood samples: one by venipuncture, one by finger prick, and one by a microneedle device. Whole blood was aliquoted and incubated overnight with SARS-CoV-2 peptides or left unstimulated. Cytokine release in plasma was measured by multiplex array. ResultsIn unstimulated samples, little to no cytokines were detected in blood collected via venipuncture or by microneedle devices. Conversely, capillary blood collected by finger prick showed detectable levels of all cytokines analysed, with significantly inflated levels of TNFα, IL-10 (p < 0.0001), IL-2, GM-CSF, and IL-13 (p < 0.01), and 53% of these samples were also positive for IFN-γ. Following peptide stimulation, 25% of samples collected via finger prick showed dysregulated production of IFN-γ, TNFα, IL-2, and IL-10, with lower cytokine production than unstimulated controls. Contrastingly, this was seen in just 4% of venous blood samples and in none of the microneedle samples. ConclusionsCapillary blood draw via a microneedle device results in highly comparable immune responses to those seen via venipuncture at baseline and following peptide stimulation, suggesting this is a viable method for rapid whole blood CRAs. Conversely, differential cytokine production is observed following capillary blood draw via finger prick.